The standard on this site is a useful answer with the evidence attached, not promotional completeness. That has a cost, and the cost is visible: pages here publish “we do not know” where competing pages publish a number.
Claims and sources
Regulatory and product claims are checked against primary sources — the regulator’s own register download, the operator’s own contract, a public API — and never against another affiliate’s summary. Where two sources disagree, the higher-ranked one decides the finding and the disagreement itself is published rather than smoothed over. The full source hierarchy, the evidence states and the controls that have to pass before a nil result is trusted are set out in how we test.
Three things are kept apart and labelled as what they are:
- What a regulator records — a register entry, with its edition date.
- What the operator claims — its own terms and its own marketing, quoted, with the date and the country the page was served to.
- What we observed — a status code, a response body, an API result, with the date and the country of the request.
Collapsing those three into one voice is how an operator’s marketing sentence ends up reading like an independent finding. It does not happen here.
Independence
Editors control conclusions. A page can end in “unknown”, “failed” or “we publish no recommendation”, and several of them do. No commercial relationship overrides an evidence state: a licence either appears in a register or it does not, and that answer is not for sale.
No affiliate link is currently active — the buttons pointing at the operator return you to this site’s home page, because no partner destination is configured. If commercial links are introduced later they will be labelled, disclosed and irrelevant to findings. Our about page states the current position, and it is updated when the position changes rather than left as a comfortable generality.
Who writes and who checks
Findings are produced by the Control Room research desk. That is currently not a named individual, and on a site about whether an operator will return somebody’s money, that is a genuine weakness rather than a stylistic preference. We are engaging an external reviewer whose identity can be verified independently by a stranger; until that person exists and has consented to be named, we say so plainly rather than inventing a byline or attaching a stock photograph to a job title.
When that person exists, their conflicts will be published, not denied. Expertise in British gambling regulation is almost always earned inside or alongside licensed operators, so a reviewer claiming no connection to the industry at all is either not much use or not being straight with you. What we will not accept, at any price: anyone who has ever taken money from this operator or the companies behind it, anyone currently working for an operator we review, and anyone who has written operator reviews for affiliate sites. Everything else goes on their page in their own words rather than being summarised by us into something reassuring.
Their authority will be real rather than decorative: they can require a correction, and a correction they require gets published under the corrections policy like any other. A reviewer who cannot force a change is a stamp, and this site has no use for one.
What we will not publish
- An APK or any download mirror. Distributing software we cannot verify is not a review.
- A bonus code we have not seen in the operator’s own material. It is the easiest thing on the internet to invent and the fastest way to waste a reader’s time.
- A game count, an RTP figure or a provider list we have not measured.
- Star ratings, scores or
AggregateRatingmarkup. No score exists here to be marked up, and fabricated review structured data is both dishonest and the most common cause of a manual penalty in this niche. - A recommendation the evidence does not support, in either direction.
Safety
This site is for adults. Nothing on it frames gambling as income, as an investment, or as a way to recover a loss, and no metric published here is a prediction about anybody’s money. Support and self-exclusion routes are reachable from every page, and the responsible gambling page names the ones that work on operators outside the British licensing system as well as the ones that do not.
Challenging what we publish
Everything here is meant to be reproducible: register downloads with their dates, contract clauses with their wording, HTTP observations with their country. If you can show that a finding is wrong, it gets changed and the change gets published with its date. That is the whole procedure, and it is on the corrections page.