UKGC Withholds Operator Complaint Data

Article Content

UKGC Refuses to Disclose Complaint Numbers

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has withheld key data on the volume of complaints it receives against licensed gambling operators, citing cost constraints. The decision, revealed in a Freedom of Information (FOI) response dated 11 June 2025, limits the ability of consumers to assess and compare the performance of gambling companies based on customer complaint levels.

The request sought three key pieces of information:

1. The total number of complaints received about operators per year.
2. The number of individual complaints investigated by the Commission per year.
3. The number and percentage of complaints relating to Betfair and other brands owned by Flutter Entertainment.

Why Was the Information Withheld?

The UKGC refused the request by invoking Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act, which allows public bodies to decline requests if the cost of fulfilling them exceeds £450, equivalent to 18 hours of staff time.

In its response, the Commission stated that while it could provide total complaint numbers from 2020 onwards, the request did not specify a timeframe. It was therefore interpreted as a request for all data held, including pre-2020 records which are not “easily extractable.” The regulator claimed that a manual review to retrieve this older data would exceed the cost limit.

Crucially, this decision means that even the more recent, accessible data from 2020 onwards was also withheld. The Commission advised that a refined, narrower request could be submitted, which would be treated as a new enquiry.

No Operator-Specific Data

Regarding the request for data on Flutter brands, the UKGC stated its standard policy: it does not “confirm or deny any information held regarding specific operators unless it is in the public interest to do so.” This prevents consumers from using FOI requests to directly compare the complaint volumes of different gambling companies.

What This Means for Consumers

This lack of transparency makes it difficult for the public to gauge customer satisfaction levels across the industry or identify operators who may be attracting a disproportionate number of complaints. Without access to this data, consumers have one less tool to make informed decisions about where to gamble safely.

The UKGC also used the response to clarify its role, noting it is an industry regulator, not a consumer ombudsman. It does not mediate or resolve individual disputes. Instead, it uses information from complaints as intelligence to “inform our regulatory approach and determine whether any action may be necessary” against an operator for potential licence breaches.

While the Commission's stance on cost and operator-specific data is a significant barrier, the response leaves the door open for more targeted requests. However, the burden remains on the public to navigate the complexities of the FOI process to obtain even basic data on industry complaint trends.