UKGC Withholds Ombudsman Scheme Details

Article Content

Regulator Blocks Release of Ombudsman Communications

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) is withholding all correspondence with the government regarding the creation of the new industry-wide Ombudsman, a Freedom of Information (FOI) response has revealed. The regulator confirmed it holds the requested information but has refused to release it, citing exemptions designed to protect internal policy discussions.

The request, dated 23 October 2025, asked for all communications between the UKGC and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) about the Ombudsman scheme from 5 July 2024 onwards. The refusal means that the crucial early-stage development of a body intended to be the ultimate arbiter for consumer complaints is happening entirely behind closed doors.

Why the Ombudsman Matters

The establishment of a single, independent Ombudsman was a cornerstone proposal of the government's Gambling Act Review White Paper. It is designed to provide consumers with a powerful, free-to-use service for seeking redress when they have unresolved complaints against a gambling operator, covering issues from unfair practices to disputes over winnings.

For consumers, the Ombudsman represents a significant shift, intended to fill a gap in the current redress system and provide a final, binding decision on disputes without the need for costly court action. The details of its remit, powers, and funding are therefore of major public interest.

The Commission's Justification

In its response, the UKGC acknowledged it holds the information but stated it was exempt from disclosure under Section 36 of the Freedom of Information Act. This section protects the "free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation."

The regulator's 'qualified person' argued that releasing the documents would likely inhibit the ability of officials to openly discuss and debate the issues. The response states:

"There is a need for a safe space for Commission officials to have free and frank exchanges with the DCMS in order for the Commission to assure itself, and therefore Government, that decision making is effective."

Public Interest vs. Secrecy

The UKGC conducted a public interest test, weighing the benefits of transparency against the potential harm of disclosure. It acknowledged a "legitimate public interest in promoting the transparency of the Commission" but ultimately concluded that the need to protect live policy deliberations was greater.

The Commission argued that premature publication could lead to an "incomplete and confusing picture" and prejudice the ongoing work. However, this decision prevents public scrutiny of how this vital consumer protection body is being formed.

Significance for Consumers

This refusal means that consumers, advocacy groups, and the wider public are currently unable to see how the Ombudsman scheme is taking shape. Key decisions about its powers, independence from industry, and ability to enforce rulings are being made without public oversight.

While the UKGC claims this confidentiality is necessary for effective policy-making, it raises questions about transparency at a critical stage. The final design of the Ombudsman will have a direct and lasting impact on the rights and protections available to every gambling consumer in the UK.