Gambling Commission: Access Friction Pushes Players To Illegal Sites

The Gambling Commission has published new research on why some people use illegal gambling websites, and it finds that access and data friction in the licensed market matter more than the search for better odds. 

The report, published on October 20, 2026, is the third phase of the regulator's work on the illegal online market and emphasises that people who use illegal sites are a small minority of gamblers. 

Our guide to UK online casinos lists licensed operators.

Four Personas Behind Illegal Site Use

The conclusions section groups users into four personas. Self-Excluders are a small group who use illegal sites to get around GamStop. 

Skilled Advocates say they gamble on illegal sites on purpose, driven by distrust of the licensed market and a desire for better value and personal freedom.

Social Explorers do not say they deliberately use illegal sites but report experiences suggesting they do. They are described as experience-led deal seekers who trust peer recommendations and accept friction in the licensed market pragmatically. 

Accidental Tourists also show some usage but appear to arrive unintentionally, drawn by frictionless play and growing frustration with licensed operators.

How People Find Illegal Sites

Digital intelligence in the study shows that the search term not on GamStop has grown well beyond its literal meaning. 

The Commission says it now works as shorthand for a bundle of features linked to the illegal market, including fewer identity checks, faster payouts and options such as credit card or cryptocurrency betting. 

That makes it a well-worn route for a broad range of consumers, not only people trying to avoid self-exclusion.

The Push Factors

A key drivers analysis ranked how strongly each factor links to illegal site use. 

The strongest were deliberate, access-related ones, namely looking for sites not blocked by GamStop and using betting sites the consumer knew would not ask for much personal data. Searching for better odds ranked lower.

The research also found confusion across all groups about what a check actually is. Consumers often use "know your customer" as a blanket term for identity, financial, and source-of-funds checks. 

It adds that similar checks are reportedly present on illegal sites as well, so people who leave the licensed market due to friction can encounter the same hurdles in a less trusted setting.

Mindset shapes behaviour as well. Skilled Advocates distrust gambling companies and regulators alike, while Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists are more ambivalent and place greater trust in peers than in official channels.

Next Steps For The Regulator

The Commission says the work enables it to track illegal site use with greater confidence. 

It will use a validated Illegal Incidence Index and a forthcoming allocation tool to follow the make-up of users through the Gambling Survey for Great Britain. Future priorities include longitudinal tracking and testing educational interventions.

Early indications suggest that Social Explorers and Accidental Tourists would respond best to messages about the lack of legal recourse, data theft, and unfair practices, while Skilled Advocates are unlikely to be moved by education and may be better studied through enforcement actions. 

Earlier phases are collected on the Commission's illegal online gambling series page.

For players, the research suggests many people are unsure what each check is for, so it helps to ask a licensed operator why one is needed. 

Our report on a coroner urging the National Lottery to join GamStop shows that self-exclusion is also in focus, and that tools for staying in control are available on our responsible gambling hub.