IBAS - Independent Betting Adjudication Service Arvostelua 

I had an issue with an online gambling business in the UK (regulated by the UKGC). I felt as though Ibwas unfairly treated in the sense that I gambled whilst self excluded which is not the issue I had. The issue was that the conpany in question denied my withdrawals but accepted by deposits and then closed my account a few hours later and sent me back just my unused deposit. They kept the rest. After exhausting their internal complaints procedure, I referred it to IBAS who were so helpful at the outset and told me what I needed to do to submit a claim. Jim was very helpful and informative and my case manager James kept me updated and was so easy to deal with. Even after the decision was made there was an issue with receiving the funds and James chased them up and within one hour it was resolved. It is such a great team and they are fair, they look at the facts and always updated me promptly. Definitely a fantastic service with really nice people working for IBAS.

I had a long running dispute with William Hill Bookmakers who were refusing to pay out winning bets in a shop because they wanted photo ID such as a passport, Driving Licence or citizens card which i have never possessed. I contacted IBAS who were simply brilliant, especially a woman named Chevelle who was exceptional.

My experience with IBAS has been nothing short of shocking. I submitted a straightforward self‑exclusion enforcement dispute, supported by clear evidence, operator admissions, and a full chronology. Instead of investigating, IBAS simply refused to engage with the case. They confirmed in writing that they had not requested any evidence from the operator, had not reviewed any material, had not assessed the dispute, and had not followed their own published process. Despite this, they attempted to dismiss the matter with a vague claim that it was “outside their remit,” even though self‑exclusion enforcement disputes are explicitly within ADR scope and fall directly under the UKGC’s consumer protection framework.

IBAS’s conduct breaches the ADR Regulations 2015 and the UKGC ADR Provider Standards. They failed to gather evidence, failed to assess both sides, failed to provide a reasoned outcome, and failed to act transparently or independently. Their contradictory statements and refusal to carry out even the most basic elements of adjudication show a complete breakdown of their responsibilities as an ADR provider. In my case, IBAS acted as an obstacle rather than a resolution service, avoiding the dispute entirely instead of performing the role they are accredited for.

This is not an ADR service. It is procedural obstruction.

Thank you for responding. However, your reply does not reflect the actual scope of my complaint.

My submission to IBAS was not a “failure to prevent an individual from gambling” complaint. It involved several issues that fall within ADR scope, including:

unexplained discrepancies in my registration details

a complete failure by the operator to comply with a lawful DSAR request

£4,100 in deposits accepted on an account the operator later confirmed should not have been active

refusal by the operator to provide any evidence or account information

a transactional dispute regarding deposits, account operation, and customer service failures

These are financial, procedural, and data‑rights issues, not a safer‑gambling assessment.

IBAS confirmed in writing that no evidence was requested from the operator, no material was reviewed, and no assessment was carried out. Your public reply does not address these points.

I will be escalating this to the Gambling Commission for review of ADR handling and procedural compliance.

Only work for gambling operators not independent at all I have previously 2 dispute with boylesports both with wining docket but my bets make it split into half winning because the operators doesn't want to pay and the I bas is agreed to them

No help whatsoever

If I can give 0 start that will be. I'm sorry if there are any professionals doing there job right, but the manager which I meet is really a frustrated person what gets payment for really nothing. They doesn't know even if the case is for them... What else to expect...

I had a dispute with BetFred.
Basically instead of putting Southwell 2.07 I wrote Southwell 2.05 No 2 - 3/1 BOG on a multiple bet.
The local shop staff did not hesitate in settling the bet as a winner but BetFred security did not agree and voided that element of the bet. I was very disappointed that with BetFred being a regular client but IBAS were great. One letter on their website with a copy of bet slip and my bet was paid out within 30 days. What I would say also is that I was patient and I am not sure if everyone would be patient.
THANK YOU IBAS

Betfred shop staff were very helpful about giving me IBAS details etc.

Don’t waste your time they drag you round in circles it’s ran by little kids by the looks of it .

Fails to Meet Basic Standards of Independent Adjudication

I referred a dispute to the IBAS and my concern is not with the outcome, but with the fairness and transparency of the process itself.

The decision appears to rely on evidence that is not fully disclosed to the customer, preventing any meaningful opportunity to review, test, or challenge the material considered. This creates a clear imbalance between the parties and is inconsistent with established principles of procedural fairness, including the expectation of “equality of arms.”

In the context of dispute resolution within the regulated gambling sector, there is a reasonable expectation—aligned with standards overseen by bodies such as the Gambling Commission—that adjudication processes will be transparent, evidence-based, and supported by sufficiently detailed reasoning. Where relevant material is withheld and explanations are limited, those standards are not met.

The position is analogous to a tribunal in which one party is required to answer a case without being permitted to see or respond to the evidence against them. In any credible system of adjudication, such a process would be regarded as fundamentally unfair.

In light of these issues, I do not consider this service to meet even the minimum standards expected of an ombudsman-style body within a regulated sector. The lack of transparency and procedural balance represents a fundamental flaw, and I would not recommend it to those seeking a fair, impartial, and accountable dispute resolution process.

Not fit for purpose

I made a complaint to IBAS because Bet600 would not pay me my winnings after almost a year and having sent them five different forms of ID including personal ID and proof of source of funds.

IBAS ruled that if Bet600 were not satisfied with my ID (for whatever spurious reason) then I had broken their terms and therefore Bet600 did not have to pay me.

There are three major issues with IBAS

Firstly, The operator does not have to prove to IBAS that you have broken their terms. Unproven suspicion is enough.

Secondly, IBAS make no ruling as to whether the bookmaker terms are fair.

Thirdly, IBAS are funded by payments from bookmakers !!

The gambling industry is crying out for an independent ombudsman and IBAS have stated that they would be interested in that role.

They are unfit for that role

----------------------------------------------------

IBAS replied to my review, but their response reinforces exactly why they are not fit for purpose.

They claim decisions are based on “all evidence from both parties” and the “balance of probabilities.” What they fail to mention is that customers are not given full disclosure of the information submitted by the bookmaker.

In my case:

I was not told the specific allegations made against me
I was not shown the evidence relied upon
I was given no meaningful opportunity to challenge the bookmaker’s claims

So the reality is simple: one side can submit information in private, while the other is expected to defend themselves without seeing it.

Calling this a “balance of probabilities” is misleading. A process cannot be balanced when one party is allowed to rely on undisclosed material.

IBAS also state they consider whether terms are unfair. However, they continue to enforce bookmaker terms without requiring robust, transparent evidence from the operator. Assertions appear to be enough.

The result is a process where:

The bookmaker controls what information is shared
The customer cannot properly respond
And IBAS accepts one-sided submissions behind closed doors

That is not independent adjudication. It is a closed process that lacks transparency and accountability.

This is not about losing a case — it is about a system where the customer is placed at a structural disadvantage from the outset.

Until IBAS require full disclosure and allow customers to properly respond to the case against them, their claim to independence will continue to be open to serious question.

Told me they wont help as William Hill CLAIM i haven't exhausted all procuderes. i sent clear evidence of The FINAL RESPONSE And was sent this
Please do not send any more details from your communications with William Hill.



This will be the final instruction on the below.

Refusal of service once shown evidence. Asked 18 times for a different staff member due to my neurological condition was discriminated against for having a ASD condition

I recently went through the IBAS process regarding a dispute with a bookmaker, and the experience has been extremely disappointing.

The core issue is not simply the outcome, but the way the decision was reached. In my case, IBAS concluded that a bet was settled correctly at revised odds, yet provided no statistical evidence, pricing model, or market comparison to support what they described as the “correct price.” There was no explanation of the underlying base price, no assessment of the promoted “boosted” price, and no transparent methodology used to justify their conclusion.

When I raised this in an appeal, the response was even more concerning. IBAS stated that they are not required to provide detailed evidence or modelling, and instead rely on their own judgment and “industry experience” to determine whether a price is an “obvious error.”

This effectively means:

No requirement to evidence how a price is calculated

No obligation to demonstrate what the correct price should have been

No transparency in how conclusions are reached

In my case, no supporting evidence was presented by the operator, and IBAS accepted their position without providing independent verification or analysis.

In my view, this undermines confidence in the fairness of the process. An independent adjudication service should be able to clearly demonstrate how it reaches its conclusions, especially in disputes involving significant financial outcomes.

The process felt one-sided, with heavy reliance on operator assertions and minimal scrutiny of how those positions were supported. Key aspects of the case, including the nature of a promoted “boosted” price and even a goodwill offer made by the operator, were not meaningfully addressed in the final reasoning.

If IBAS is to be considered a truly independent adjudicator, greater transparency, accountability, and evidential standards are essential.

Very frustrating experience and not what I expected from an independent dispute resolution service.

I raised a case to IBAS on the 26th December 2025
It has taken just short of 3 months to finally get a final decision.

Sky bet basically banned me after my bet had started from using the acca freeze promotion. The whole bet came in including the team I wanted to freeze who then conceded an equaliser in the 92nd minute. Full return was £2800.

IBAS reviewed the case agreed sky bets procedure was wrong and that they should have to communicate to me as soon as I’m banned from using the promotion.
3 months on ive still not been told I am banned.

The fact an adjudicator can agree with you but still make a decision in favour of the gambling company is crazy an just proof that IBAS is in the pocket of the gambling company’s.

Gimps

Staff members are extremely slow, Idk where they trained them and why they are so rude and irrogant. Will never use again

James provided an excellent service from start to finish. He helped me take on the might of Betfair with consummate ease and professionalism. He did such a good job that it didn’t even reach the adjudication stage - Betfair paid out before that. Can’t thank him enough!

Although the process took a while, IBAS investigated my complaint in detail, and gave a full and fair explanation at the end of the process. Both sides were given time to explain their side of things, and although the outcome wasn't the one I was hoping for, I feel that my case was taken seriously, rather than being fobbed off.

Limited hassle to report a claim, dealt with professionally and efficiently. Hats off to James for dealing with my case against Betfair. Without IBAS, normal punters like me with a case and a shoddy complaints team at Betfair, we would be screwed.

I made a deposit using my husband card on a uk casino .
I won a bit and the casino withheld my winnings and gave me only my deposits
Do I have a case to get my winnings ?

In 2019 I used IBAS and was sceptical simply on the bases that they are funded by bookmakers and their resolution team whether intentional or otherwise are bound to form working relationships with individuals at a bookmaker and this may lead to bias and unbalanced decision, especially if the bookmaker on previous cases has built up credibility with IBAS.

In my experience I found the fastest way to resolve a bet dispute and get your money is to firstly understand the bookmakers rules so that you can objectively challenge them. If you have acted honestly and not breached them, take them to court. Remember many bookmakers may have unfair terms, which have not been tested in court. The Gambling Commission is a regulatory body by the way and do not investigate disputes but you should let them know if a bookmaker has stolen your funds, as this will be a black mark against them.

I have taken a Bookmaker to Court twice and succeeded on both occasions. A word of warning you do need to know what you are doing as they always have legal representation. In both my cases they defended the case in the hope I would drop the case. The process can be complicated as after issuing a MoneyClaim (a simple process). If the case ends up in a hearing even fast track, you need to be able to prepare multiple documents including a court bundle. You must be prepared to cross examine their witnesses and be cross examined yourself based only on the evidence in the court bundle. This isn’t for the faint hearted as the case might be scheduled for 1/2 or even 1 day.

IBAS may be useful in less complex cases but where funds and winnings have been confiscated (stolen) (which wasn’t the situation in any of my cases) I really would go straight to court. If you are unable to prepare for the case I would strongly suggest you appoint a specialist solicitor familiar with gambling law. If you win their costs are likely to be awarded but you must realise that if you lose in court you may end up paying the bookmakers costs.

The moral is:- the more people that become court savvy and the more cases brought to court the better chance bookmakers will rethink their stance. Their legal team cost money, and if they lose what savings are they making.

My best bit of advice is all bets placed online take clear photographs as you place them with the bet ID time and date. If multiples as the winners come in take further photographs. Also regularly download your transaction history so that you are able to prove a long history. Most importantly a photo of your account settings. A/C no, name and address and that your account has been validated.

Record everything online or on the phone and don’t resort to insults as a court will not look on this very favourably.

Helped me get my £2700 back from dodgy betfred. 10/10