UKGC Can't Track SR Complaint Outcomes
FOI reveals regulator cannot easily report on resolutions for social responsibility complaints due to data storage methods.
A Freedom of Information request has revealed the UK Gambling Commission cannot provide data on the outcomes of consumer complaints related to social responsibility breaches. The regulator cited cost and time constraints, explaining the information is not held in a searchable format. This highlights a lack of public transparency on how often such complaints are resolved in favour of the consumer.
Article Content
UKGC Cites Data Hurdles in Reporting on Social Responsibility Complaint Outcomes
A Freedom of Information (FOI) request has revealed that the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) is unable to easily provide detailed data on consumer complaints related to breaches of its Social Responsibility Code.
In a response dated 24 December 2023, the regulator stated that retrieving information on the resolution of these complaints, or details on problem gambling refund requests, would exceed the cost and time limits permitted under the Freedom of Information Act. This highlights a significant gap in publicly available data on how operators handle player protection failures.
Why This Data Matters
Consumers who believe a gambling operator has failed in its duty of care, such as not intervening to prevent gambling harm, often file complaints citing breaches of the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP). Data on how these complaints are resolved is crucial for understanding industry standards and whether operators are being held accountable. The inability to access this information makes it difficult for the public to assess the effectiveness of the complaints process for player protection issues.
Breakdown of the FOI Response
The request sought four key pieces of information. The UKGC’s response revealed the following:
-
Social Responsibility (SR) Complaints: The Commission confirmed it holds information on complaints related to SR Code breaches but refused to provide it. It explained that details are recorded in a ‘free text’ field, which would require a manual review of every individual record. This process was deemed too costly and time-consuming under Section 12 of the FOIA.
-
Problem Gambling Refunds: Similarly, details on refund requests and voluntary refunds issued by operators were also withheld for the same reason, as this information is not held in an easily searchable format.
-
Total Complaints vs. Resolutions: The UKGC stated it can report the total number of complaints received against operators. However, it does not hold data on whether these complaints were “resolved in favour of the public.” The Commission clarified its role, stating, “We are an industry regulator and not an ombudsman... We do not become involved in or ‘act upon’ individual complaints.”
-
Charitable Contributions (RET): The regulator acknowledged holding data on operator contributions to Research, Prevention, and Treatment (RET) organisations since 1 January 2020. However, it noted “multiple caveats” with the data, including issues where operators under the same parent company report identical contributions, making an accurate breakdown difficult.
Significance for Consumers
The UKGC’s response underscores a critical distinction in its function: it uses consumer complaints to inform its regulatory actions against operators, not to mediate or resolve individual disputes. While it can provide high-level data on the volume of complaints, the lack of accessible information on outcomes for social responsibility failures means consumers have limited visibility into this key area of player protection.
The difficulty in extracting this specific data suggests that tracking harm-related complaint trends is not a simple, automated process for the regulator. For consumers, this means there is no central, public database from the UKGC to show how often complaints about player safety are upheld.