How to check an online casino licence against the Gambling Commission register, field by field

The footer is the claim; the register is the test

Every casino site that serves Great Britain under a Gambling Commission licence is required to say so where you gamble. Licence condition 8.1.1 obliges a remote licensee to display “on every screen from which customers are able to access gambling facilities” three things: “a statement that they are licensed and regulated by the Gambling Commission”, “their account number”, and “a link (which will be supplied by the Commission) to their current licensed status as recorded on the Commission’s website”.

That sentence in the footer is a claim made by the business. The Commission’s own consumer guidance says what to do with it: check that “the details of the licence (including activities and website domain names) match the public register”. The check, in other words, is a comparison. This page does the comparison on a real brand and shows every value it compared.

Five fields carry the weight. The legal name of the business. Its account number. The domain you are actually on. The remote activity that covers what the site offers. And the status of that activity, with its dates. The method used here is to record each of those from the footer first, then find the same five on the register, then write down whether they match, with the date. Nothing else on this page is a conclusion; everything else is context for reading those five fields correctly.

Scope, stated plainly. “UKGC” is common shorthand, but this is a Great Britain register: its pages address readers “in Great Britain”, and section 36 of the Gambling Act 2005 is framed around facilities “used there”. A record on it says nothing about any other market. This page did not open an account, deposit or play on any site; it read public pages and recorded what they said on 18 September 2026.

Sources: LCCP licence condition 8.1.1, Display of licensed status (remote operators); Gambling Commission: What to look at before you gamble.

Copy the footer before you open the register

Record three things from the site before searching anything: the exact licensing sentence, the account number it gives, and the web address behind the link on that number. The wording matters because the register indexes legal names, and a footer that names the wrong company, or no company, is already a finding.

The footer of wizardslots.com, retrieved on 18 September 2026, read: “Wizard Slots is operated by Jumpman Gaming Limited which is licensed and regulated in Great Britain by the Gambling Commission under account number 39175.” A second sentence read: “For customers outside of Great Britain Wizard Slots is regulated by the Alderney Gambling Control Commission.” The registered address line gave “La Corvee House, La Corvee, Alderney, Channel Islands, GY9 3TQ”.

The account number was a link. Its address was https://registers.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/39175. Requested directly, that address returned a 302 redirect to https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/public-register/business/detail/39175, the register page for the same account. That is the “link (which will be supplied by the Commission)” that condition 8.1.1 describes: a short address on a Commission domain that resolves to the record.

The link is worth testing on its own. A footer that shows a regulator’s logo with no number and no link is missing two of the three items the condition requires. A link that points somewhere other than the Commission’s own domain is a mismatch before you have read a single register field. Copy the address by inspecting the link rather than by clicking it, so that what you record is what the page contains and not where you ended up. Put the date beside it; a footer changes when a brand changes hands, and both halves of the comparison need one.

Sources: wizardslots.com homepage footer; registers.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/39175 (redirect); LCCP licence condition 8.1.1.

Reading a register record one field at a time

The register’s search page accepts a business name, a trading name, a domain name or an account number. On 18 September 2026 it reported 2,638 records and a last-updated date of the same day. The account number is the cleanest key, because it is the one item the site is required to print and because two businesses can share a trading name. Searching “wizardslots.com” and searching “Wizard Slots” both returned one result on that date: Jumpman Gaming Limited, account 39175, matched on the domain www.wizardslots.com.

A record has a licence summary and four tabs: trading names, domain names, premises and regulatory actions, each with a count. The search page publishes a table called “The fields in this register”, and its definitions are the ones to hold in mind while reading. “Account name” is “the legal name of the gambling business”. “Account number” is “the unique reference number of the business”. “Activity from” is “the date the business was most recently granted a licence to operate this product”; “Activity until” is “the date the business stopped operating this product”. “Regulatory actions” are “sanctions and/or settlements imposed by the Gambling Commission as a result of regulatory action or investigation”.

The summary for account 39175 gave the account name Jumpman Gaming Limited and a head office address of La Corvee House, La Corvee, Alderney, GY9 3TQ, United Kingdom. The register warns that “the full address may not show due to requests made by the business”, so an abbreviated address is not by itself a discrepancy. It listed two activity rows. Bingo, Remote, Active, from 1 Nov 2014 to Current. Casino, Remote, Active, from 1 Nov 2014 to Current. Both rows carried the same licence number, 039175-R-319452-025, which begins with the account number.

The date on those rows is not arbitrary. Section 36 of the Gambling Act 2005 was amended with effect from 1 November 2014 so that the Act reaches remote gambling where “no such equipment is situated in Great Britain but the facilities are used there”. A “from” date of 1 November 2014 on a remote activity is a grant dated the day that amendment took effect. It is not the date of this check, and “most recently granted” is the register’s own definition of the field, not a promise of continuous activity since.

The tabs read Trading names (0), Domain names (234), Premises (0) and Regulatory actions (0). The trading names page said “No trading names have been recorded for this business.” The regulatory actions page said “No regulatory actions have been recorded for this business.” So the words “Wizard Slots” appear nowhere on this record as a name; the brand exists on the register only as a domain. That is the first thing a reader who searched by brand needs to notice.

Open the full-size figure

Sources: Register of gambling businesses (search page and field definitions); Register: Jumpman Gaming Limited licence summary; Register: Jumpman Gaming Limited trading names; Register: Jumpman Gaming Limited regulatory actions; Register search results for wizardslots.com; Gambling Act 2005, section 36.

wizardslots.com checked against account 39175, end to end

The table below is the whole check. Each row takes one element of the footer, names the register page where its counterpart lives, gives the value the register showed on 18 September 2026, and states the result in the narrowest words the evidence supports.

The result, in one sentence with its date: on 18 September 2026 the five checkable claims in the wizardslots.com footer matched the register record for account 39175, and the domain was listed under that account with the status White Label. That is the entire finding. It says nothing about the brand’s owner, its terms, its payout times or its games, and it will need repeating before it is relied on again.

One row deserves a word. The site prints “Channel Islands” and the register prints “United Kingdom” after the same house, street and postcode. The part a reader can test agrees; the country line is recorded here as a difference, not resolved.

Sources: wizardslots.com homepage footer; Register: Jumpman Gaming Limited licence summary; Register: Jumpman Gaming Limited domain names; Register: Jumpman Gaming Limited regulatory actions; Register of public statements.

Active, Inactive and White Label on the domain list

The domain names tab for account 39175 is where the scale of a white-label operator becomes visible. The register’s field table says a domain’s status “can be ‘Active’, ‘Inactive’ or ‘White label’”. The tab on the summary page read 234; the heading on the domain page itself read 233. This page transcribed the list twice on 18 September 2026 and recovered 231 rows both times, with identical contents: 18 Active, 80 Inactive and 133 White Label. The two-row gap between the transcription and the page heading, and the one-row gap between the two register pages, are recorded here as observed. Neither changes the reading.

The 18 Active rows included amazonslots.com, doveslots.com, lootcasino.com and www.aladdinslots.com. The 133 White Label rows included www.wizardslots.com, feverslots.com, luckycowbingo.com, thesunplay.co.uk and dailyrecordbingo.com. The 80 Inactive rows included 777cherry.com, dealornodeal.co.uk and onlinebingo.com. The register does not say what distinguishes an Active domain from a White Label one; it only defines the three values as the possible statuses.

What the Commission does say is who answers for a white-label site. Its page on licensees’ responsibilities for third parties, dated 8 November 2024, states: “The responsibility for compliance of all operating gambling websites, including white labelled sites, sits with the licence holder and cannot be transferred to any other party.” The 2019 to 2020 compliance and enforcement report put it the same way: “Responsibility for compliance will always sit with the licence holder.”

For a reader, this settles which record to open. If the footer names a licensee that is not the brand, the licensee’s record is the one that matters, because the licensee is the party the Commission holds responsible. Wizard Slots is not on the register as a name; Jumpman Gaming Limited is. Checking a white-label brand means checking the operator’s account and then finding the brand’s domain on that operator’s list.

An Inactive domain is still on the record, and a search can still return it. That is not a fault in the register; it is a history. But it means a search hit on a domain is not the end of the check. The status beside the domain, and the status on the activity row, both have to be read.

Sources: Register: Jumpman Gaming Limited domain names; Register of gambling businesses (field definitions); Gambling Commission: Licensees’ responsibilities for third parties; Compliance and Enforcement report 2019 to 2020: White label partnerships.

When the search returns a different company, or two

A search for “sky vegas” on 18 September 2026 returned two results. Bonne Terre Gaming Limited, account 65519, trading as Sky Vegas, matched on m.skyvegas.com and www.skyvegas.com. Bonne Terre Limited, account 38718, also trading as Sky Vegas, matched on the same two domains. Same brand, same domains, two legal names, two records.

The records are not equivalent. Account 65519, with a head office at 4th Floor, 55 Line Wall, Gibraltar, listed five trading names (sky bet games, sky bingo, sky casino, sky poker, sky vegas) and six domains, all Active, and two activities: Bingo, Remote, Active, from 18 Nov 2024 to Current, and Casino, Remote, Active, from 18 Nov 2024 to Current, both under licence 065519-R-339675-002. Account 38718, with a head office at 4 Wellington Place, Leeds, listed eight domains, all Inactive, and five activity rows, every one of them Surrendered, with a “to” date of 31 Oct 2025.

Which record is the right one to read depends on which company the footer names. This page could not retrieve the skyvegas.com footer on 18 September 2026; the site’s robots rules blocked the request. So this page does not say which company that footer names, and a reader who wants the answer has to open the site and read it. What the register alone establishes is narrower: one company trading as Sky Vegas held active remote Casino and Bingo activities on that date, and another company trading as Sky Vegas had stopped operating all of its activities on 31 October 2025, each row marked Surrendered.

Surrender has a statutory meaning. Under section 113 of the Gambling Act 2005 an operating licence “shall cease to have effect” if the licensee notifies the Commission of the intention to surrender it and returns the licence or explains why it cannot. The register defines Surrendered as a licence “given up by the business as it is no longer required”. A surrendered activity with a “to” date is a closed period. It tells you when that company stopped operating that product; it does not tell you whether the brand moved, and here the second record shows that it did.

When a search returns nothing, the register says so in plain words: “No results for” the term, then “Try another search or view the full register”. Before treating that as a finding, search again by the account number from the footer, then by the domain without www, then by the legal name; two of those keys are ones the site is required to print. If none returns a record, what you have established is that the site is not showing a record on this register under the details it gives. That is the point at which the Commission’s reporting route exists: its “Tell us something in confidence” page lists “unlicensed gambling or criminal activity” among the things it accepts.

Sources: Register search results for “sky vegas”; Register: Bonne Terre Gaming Limited licence summary; Register: Bonne Terre Gaming Limited trading names; Register: Bonne Terre Gaming Limited domain names; Register: Bonne Terre Limited licence summary; Register: Bonne Terre Limited domain names; Gambling Act 2005, section 113; Register search: no-results wording (test query); Gambling Commission: Tell us something in confidence.

What each licence status means, in the register’s words and the Act’s

The register’s search page lists nine status values and gives each a one-line definition. The Gambling Act 2005 supplies the mechanism behind most of them. Section 110 sets the default: an operating licence “shall continue to have effect unless and until it ceases to have effect in accordance with” a duration determination under section 111, or sections 113, 114, 115, 118 or 119. The table pairs each register value with its definition and its statutory basis. Where the Act does not supply a specific section, the cell says so.

Two reading rules follow from the table. First, status is shown per activity row, not once per business. Bonne Terre Limited’s record carried five rows and each said Surrendered; another business could hold Casino Active and Betting Surrendered on the same page. Read the row for the product the site offers. Second, a status that is not Active is not a verdict on the business; Surrendered and Expired describe the licensee’s own decisions, while Suspended, Revoked and Forfeited describe someone else’s. The register tells you which; it does not tell you why, and the reasons, where the Commission publishes them, sit in the public statements register rather than the business record.

Sources: Register of gambling businesses (status definitions); Gambling Act 2005, section 110; section 111; section 113; section 114; section 115; section 118; section 119.

What the register cannot tell you

A matched record establishes that a named business held a licence for a named activity on the day you looked, that the domain you were on was declared under that business, and whether the Commission has recorded sanctions or settlements against it. The Commission’s guidance adds what that is for: a licensed business means you “will be protected by consumer and gambling protection rules in Great Britain”. Those are the boundaries of the finding.

The register does not measure how quickly a site pays out, whether its games return what they claim, what its bonus terms require, or how it handles a complaint. It does not say who owns a white-label brand, and it does not vouch for the domains and trading names it lists; those “are provided by the gambling business” and the Commission “cannot guarantee the accuracy of information provided by third parties”. A domain that is not on any record is simply not on any record; the register does not say why.

It also does not answer the question people most often type, which is whether a site is “legit”. Licensed and legitimate are different words. The register answers the first for one jurisdiction on one date. Everything in the second word that goes beyond the first has to come from other evidence: the site’s terms, its published complaint route, the rules that apply to the activity, and your own record of how it behaved.

Finally, a check is dated. The register reported a last-updated date of 18 September 2026 when this page was written, and it moves: the Sky Vegas records show one company’s activities ending on 31 October 2025 and another’s beginning on 18 November 2024. Section 33 of the Act makes providing facilities for gambling an offence unless an exception applies, the main one being an operating licence that authorises the activity, and section 36 carries that to remote facilities used in Great Britain. A record that matched last year is not evidence that it matches today; repeat the five-field comparison and write the new date down.

Sources: Gambling Commission: Make sure that the gambling business is licensed; Register of gambling businesses; Gambling Act 2005, section 33; section 36.

The one-page checklist

The method of this page in ten steps. Tick the boxes as you go and print when you are done; the print button removes everything else so the checklist and your notes fit on one sheet. A ticked box records that you did the step. It is not evidence of a licence; the register is.

The checklist refers to Great Britain’s register only. A footer that also names the Alderney Gambling Control Commission, the Malta Gaming Authority or another regulator is making a separate claim about a separate register, and the note on foreign licence badges sets out how to record that one without folding it into this check. For a second worked example on a single-brand operator, the William Hill register example follows the same fields on account 39225.