The complaints register

What the categories show

Complaints are coded into six categories at the point of filing. Stalled or delayed withdrawals accounted for 1,187 of the 2,914, or 40.7 percent. Verification and document holds came second at 604. Bonus terms and forfeited balances followed at 512.

The remaining three categories are smaller and slower to move through the coverage cycle. Account limitation or closure produced 288 complaints, responsible gambling tool failures 174, and game or settlement disputes 149.

Median resolution times differ sharply by category. Responsible gambling complaints closed at a median of 4 days across the register, settlement disputes at 7, account limitations at 9, bonus disputes at 12, withdrawals at 16, and verification holds at 21. The slowest queue on this site is the document queue, and it has been the slowest queue in each of the last three quarterly cuts.

Unresolved is the number that matters

A complaint that closes in 30 days is a data point. A complaint still open at the cutoff is an unfinished obligation, so the register sorts on that column first.

Of the 611 open at 31 July 2026, 268 concerned withdrawals, 141 verification holds, 96 bonus terms, 61 account limitations, 27 responsible gambling tools, and 18 game settlements. Withdrawal and verification complaints together made up 66.9 percent of everything left open, against 61.4 percent of everything filed. Those two categories are over represented in the backlog.

Reporting across player accounts and the operators' own published terms points at the same joint: money is requested, documents are then requested, and the clock restarts. The register does not assert intent. It records how long the file stayed open, and it publishes the operator's account of why when one is given.

Where the enforcement field reads zero

Each file carries a field for regulator actions recorded in the period. In this cut, 33 of the 41 files carry a zero. Where the field reads zero, the record is clean, and this site says so in those words rather than leaving a silence for a reader to misread.

The eight files that carry an entry are sourced to the regulator's own published notice, with the date and the issuing body named on the file. The register does not record an action that has not been published by the regulator, and it does not describe an inquiry, a report or a rumour as an action. Nothing goes in that field from a tip alone.

Readers who spot an omission in either direction should write to the corrections desk. The process is set out at [/corrections/](/corrections/).

What this site refuses to do

North Casino Report does not review an operator it has no complaint file on. No file, no page, whatever the commercial interest in publishing one. That rule costs the site traffic on new brand launches and it is not up for renegotiation.

The site also refuses to publish first hand play claims. No reporter here deposits, withdraws or plays through a bonus for copy. Everything published is reported across the market, from player accounts, from documents readers send us, and from the operator's published terms.

Funding is disclosed in plain terms at [/standards/](/standards/) and again at [/terms/](/terms/). The site may be paid when a reader opens an account through a link. That payment changes nothing about the order of the register or the ranked table.

Where to go next

The full register, the file structure and the long form investigations sit at [/dossier/](/dossier/). A worked example of an individual file, showing every field a reader can expect, is at : 63 complaints filed, 7 unresolved at the cutoff, median 11 days to resolve, regulator actions 0.

The secondary ranked list, which asks which operators handle complaints best rather than which pay best, is at [/rankings/](/rankings/). Editorial standards and the funding disclosure are at [/standards/](/standards/); the corrections log policy is at [/corrections/](/corrections/); the three people who produce the site are named at [/masthead/](/masthead/).