What this site is for
Almost every review of an online casino describes a product: games, payment logos, support hours, a licence mentioned in one line, and a score. What none of them tells you is which company you are contracting with when you deposit — and that is the fact that decides what happens if something goes wrong.
The Gambling Commission publishes the answer for free, in a public register carrying every licensee's legal name, account number, registered office, licence status and declared domains. It is authoritative and it is open to anyone. It also cannot be searched by casino name, so for the reader holding a brand rather than a company it is close to unusable. We read it against the brands players actually see, and put the company back on the page.
Reading it against 139 live British casino brands returned 48 companies. That is not a technicality about corporate structure — it is the difference between a market of 139 independent operators and one where most of the brands presented as alternatives to each other share a licence, a platform, a set of terms and a complaints desk.
Who writes it
The site is unattributed editorial. There is no byline, no author portrait and no invented biography, and that is a deliberate decision rather than an omission. The whole value of what is published here is verifiable provenance: here is the register URL, here is the account number, here is the date it was read. Putting a pseudonym and a generated headshot on top of that would place fabricated provenance over an argument built on checkable provenance.
What replaces a byline is method. How we assess a casino sets out what is checked and in what order. Where the facts come from names the sources and separates regulator documents from operators' own claims. Corrections explains how errors are handled, and every page carrying licence data shows the date the register was read.
And who is behind this site
A site arguing that you should know which company is behind a casino owes you the same answer about itself, so here it is without the hedging. Casino Reviews is an independent editorial project, not a licensed operator, not an affiliate of one, and not connected to any company named on it. It is reachable at [email protected], which is a real inbox read by a person.
What we are not publishing is a company name and registered address, and the honest reason is that inventing or approximating either would be worse than the gap. Nothing on the site is monetised, there is nothing to buy, no account to open and no data collected, so there is no transaction a reader needs an incorporated counterparty for. If that changes — if this becomes a commercial operation with a licensed entity behind it — that entity gets named here in the same release, alongside the change to the disclosure page.
The asymmetry is real and worth naming rather than glossing: an operator holding a Gambling Commission licence is legally obliged to publish its company details, and we are not. What we can offer instead is that every factual claim here is traceable to a document you can open yourself — the sources page names them, and corrections records what happens when we get one wrong. Judge the method, because the byline is deliberately not there to judge.
What is covered
51 brands have a page: 40 with a full operational record from published terms, and 11 found by reading the domains declared under a licence we had already verified. The second group's company, account and registered office are confirmed at source while their deposit and payout details are absent from our records — and those pages say so rather than filling the gap with an estimate.
Beyond the reviewed brands, the lookup tool covers the whole register: 2,664 licensed businesses read 31st July 2026, of which 604 declare a website, carrying 2,135 gambling domains between them.
What is not covered, on purpose
No bonus offers or promotional codes: bonus terms decay faster than anything else on a casino site, and promoting inducements is advertising rather than reference. No playable games or free demos: a site arguing for licence transparency should not also be somewhere you gamble. No overall score out of ten, because a single number invites readers to trust the number instead of the facts behind it — and it would be the easiest thing here to sell.
How it is paid for
It is not, currently. There are no affiliate links, no paid placements, no sponsored entries and no commercial relationship with any operator named. Nothing on the site is monetised, which is why ordering is by licensed company rather than by anything that could be bought. If that changes, the pages carrying a paid link will say so on the page itself and the disclosure page will change in the same release.
There is also no analytics. No tracking script, no tag manager, no cookie set by us. That is a statement of what the site does rather than a privacy position being advertised, and the privacy page says the same thing in more detail.
Reaching us
If a casino has treated you badly, the complaints page sets out where that goes and what each step can achieve — it is the practical payoff of knowing which company holds the licence.
Corrections are welcome and wanted. If the register says something different from a page here, the register is right — write to [email protected] or use the contact page. Please be gambling-aware: if the reason you are reading this is that gambling has stopped being fun, the page on self-exclusion and GAMSTOP is more useful than anything else here.