How to complain about a bookmaker in the UK

Start with the bookmaker or casino itself, not the Gambling Commission — the regulator has said plainly that it "does not resolve or make decisions on complaints regarding gambling-related transactions." Complain to the operator directly using its own complaints procedure. If it isn't resolved within 8 weeks (or you receive a final "deadlock" response sooner), you can escalate to the specific Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) provider the operator names — the operator's deadlock letter or terms should tell you which one applies to your dispute, since different operators use different approved providers (for example IBAS, the gambling sector's specialist ADR body).

How the process actually works

Step 1: Complain to the operator directly

Every UK-licensed operator must have a complaints procedure and make it available to you. Check any relevant terms and conditions first, then contact the operator with the specifics: dates, times, amounts, and any evidence (screenshots, account history, bet slips, emails or live-chat transcripts). This step isn't optional — you cannot take a dispute to an ADR provider without going through the operator's own process first.

Step 2: Give the operator up to 8 weeks

The operator has a maximum of 8 weeks from receiving your complaint to resolve it. It may respond sooner with a final "deadlock" letter if it considers the matter closed on its side — that letter should point you to the ADR provider it uses, which is what you need for the next step.

Step 3: Escalate to an Alternative Dispute Resolution provider

Once you've exhausted the operator's own process, you can take a genuine contractual dispute — withheld winnings, a wrongly voided bet, a disputed palpable error (see our palpable error guide) — to the operator's ADR provider. This is a free, independent adjudication service, separate from both the operator and the regulator.

IBAS (the Independent Betting Adjudication Service) is a gambling-specialist ADR provider covering the relevant betting, casino and remote-gambling sectors, and describes itself as providing "impartial adjudications" that are binding on the operator up to £10,000. It does not cover everything, though — by its own stated scope, IBAS does not adjudicate: claims that you were treated irresponsibly (a Gambling Commission matter, not a contractual one); complaints about GAMSTOP or self-exclusion effectiveness; general customer-service standards; fraud, cheating or unfair-game allegations; underage-gambling complaints; or most disputes about a bet that was simply refused or an account that was restricted or closed, which are treated as commercial decisions rather than a breach of an accepted bet.

Not every operator uses IBAS. The Gambling Commission's current published list names several other approved ADR providers for the gambling sector alongside IBAS (including eCOGRA and CEDR) — check your operator's terms or deadlock letter for the specific one they've named, since taking a dispute to the wrong provider wastes the time limit.

A regulatory change worth knowing about, even though it doesn't change this process: from April 2026, the Gambling Commission is no longer the authority that approves and monitors ADR providers for gambling — that role transferred to the Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI) under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024. The Commission remains the gambling regulator and says it continues working with CTSI "to ensure consistency and certainty for ADR providers in the sector." For you as a consumer, the practical journey above is unchanged — this affects who accredits an ADR provider, not how you use one.

What the Gambling Commission does — and doesn't do — with your complaint

The Commission is explicit that it does not adjudicate individual gambling-transaction disputes. What it does want to hear about, through its separate reporting channel, is regulatory intelligence: match-fixing or betting-integrity concerns, underage gambling, suspected money laundering, other suspicious activity, or unlicensed/criminal gambling operations. A report there can feed into wider regulatory action against an operator, but — by the Commission's own words — "complaints received by this service will not be processed" as an individual case, and it won't get your specific money back. That's what the operator-then-ADR route above is for.

The Commission has also been explicit that some things simply aren't disputes it — or usually ADR — will step into: how an operator manages commercial risk on individual accounts, such as stake reductions or account restrictions, is something it has said is "not within our regulatory remit to mandate."

Is there a "gambling ombudsman"? Not yet

A non-statutory Gambling Ombudsman was proposed in the government's 2023 gambling White Paper, intended to eventually replace the current multi-provider ADR model with a single, free, independent body for social responsibility as well as contractual complaints. As of the most recent official government position on record, this has not progressed to launch — an early target of taking claims from summer 2024 has passed without it happening. Until it exists and is confirmed operational, the process above (operator → ADR provider → Commission for regulatory matters, separately) is the current, real route — treat any claim that a single gambling ombudsman is already up and running as out of date unless you can verify it directly.

What evidence to keep from the start

Whichever stage you're at, keep: account username/reference numbers, exact dates, times and amounts, screenshots of the bet, promotion or balance in question, and the specific emails or live-chat messages the dispute turns on (rather than an entire chat history). Both the operator's internal process and any ADR adjudication will assess your case against the operator's own published terms, so keep a copy of the relevant terms as they stood at the time, not just as they read today.

When your issue isn't really a "dispute"

Not every frustrating outcome is something a complaint or ADR referral can reverse. Commercial decisions an operator is generally free to make — reducing your stake, limiting which markets you can bet on, or closing your account — sit outside both the Commission's remit and most ADR providers' scope, unless the operator broke its own published rules or an obligation it had already taken on (such as honouring a free bet you'd already qualified for). See our account restrictions and stake limits guide for how widespread this actually is and where the line is drawn.

Related content

See our guides to palpable error for how a specific pricing-mistake dispute is judged, account restrictions and stake limits for what operators can do without it being a "dispute," and UK gambling licensing explained for how the Gambling Commission's regulatory role fits together with the complaints process above.