UKGC Lacks Operator-Specific eCOGRA Dispute Data

Article Content

Regulator Does Not Hold Key Dispute Data

London, UK – The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) does not hold detailed, operator-specific data on the outcomes of customer complaints handled by eCOGRA, one of the country's main Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) providers. This was revealed in a response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request dated 21 January 2026.

The disclosure highlights a significant gap in the data collected by the regulator, making it difficult for the public to access a centralised, comparative record of how individual gambling companies handle customer disputes.

The Request for Transparency

ADR services like eCOGRA are a crucial part of consumer protection. They offer an impartial and free service for consumers to escalate complaints when they cannot resolve them directly with a gambling operator. These disputes can range from disagreements over bonus terms to withheld winnings and account closures.

The FOI request sought to bring transparency to this process by asking for:

• The total number of disputes handled by eCOGRA.
• A breakdown of how many disputes were resolved in favour of the consumer versus the operator.
• The names of the specific operators associated with these outcomes.
• A breakdown of outcomes by the type of dispute, such as bonus-related issues.

This information would allow consumers to see which operators generate the most complaints and how fairly those complaints are ultimately resolved.

UKGC Response: Information Not Held

In its response, the Gambling Commission stated it could not provide the requested information because it does not collect it.

The Commission's official response was: "The Gambling Commission do not collect information directly from eCOGRA in relation to disputes received and processed by them."

Instead of providing the data, the UKGC directed the requester to publicly available annual and quarterly reports on eCOGRA's own website. While these reports contain aggregated data, the FOI response confirms that the regulator itself does not hold the more granular, operator-specific information that was requested.

Why This Matters for Consumers

For consumers, the ability to compare operators based on their complaint-handling record is a vital tool for making informed choices. Without a central database held by the regulator, it is challenging to build a clear picture of industry-wide performance or identify specific operators with poor track records.

The UKGC's response indicates that the primary oversight of ADR performance may rely on reviewing the aggregated reports published by the ADR providers themselves, rather than the regulator collecting and analysing raw, operator-specific data.

This lack of centrally held data raises questions about the regulator's ability to proactively identify patterns of non-compliance or unfair treatment of customers by individual licence holders. It places the burden on consumers and consumer groups to piece together information from disparate sources, hindering efforts to promote greater transparency and accountability across the industry.