Non-GamStop Curacao Casino Sites: What to Check

A practical way to assess licensing claims, exclusion boundaries and safety when no verified casino list is available.

What “best” means when no verified casino list is available

“Best” sounds like a clear verdict. In practice, it can mean the biggest bonus, the flashiest games, or a site that makes a confident claim about where it is licensed. Those things are not the same as evidence that a casino is suitable for you. I would not treat a polished ranking of Curacao casinos as proof that the names on it have been checked or compared on equal terms.

So I’m not going to put casino names in order and call one the best Curacao casino for UK players. That would look useful, but a ranking without a reliable basis is just an advert wearing a referee’s shirt. The more helpful question is what the word “best” would need to mean before you trusted it.

Start with the claim itself. A site may describe itself as Curacao-licensed, safe, trusted, or suitable for British players. Those are statements made by the site, not independent confirmation simply because they appear on its pages. The same goes for a review that repeats them. If a page does not make clear what its judgement rests on, a gold badge or a top spot tells you very little.

That matters when you see lists of Curacao casinos without GamStop. “Not on GamStop” describes a relationship to a self-exclusion scheme; it does not, by itself, tell you whether a casino is a good choice, what protections it offers, or whether its other claims deserve your confidence. I would not let one label stand in for all those separate questions.

There is a practical point worth keeping in view: players can choose to ban themselves from gambling with UK-licensed online casinos through GamStop. If you have made that choice, a list advertised as showing casinos outside the scheme should not be read as a recommendation to find somewhere else to play. A tempting shortcut can still cut across the reason you chose to exclude yourself. That is not a small detail.

Casino Sites: Deposits, Licensing and UK Access

I used to find confident language reassuring. “Best,” “trusted,” and “top-rated” sound like someone has done the boring checking for you. But the word only earns its place if the page explains what was assessed and gives you a reason to believe the assessment applies to the particular operator in front of you. Without that, it is decoration. Nice font, same uncertainty.

For a useful comparison, you would want the claims to be specific enough to assess and tied to the casino being discussed, not just to a general idea of what a Curacao casino ought to offer. You would also want a ranking to explain why one site comes above another. A page that moves straight from a broad label to “number one” has skipped the part that matters. I’m wary of that leap.

The same caution applies to phrases such as “best online casino in Curacao” or “best Curacao casinos online”. They can blur together several different things: where an operator says it is licensed, who can access its site, what protections apply to a player, and whether the games or services suit that person. A single superlative cannot settle all of those. Read it as a claim, not a finding.

Nor does adding “2026” make a list more dependable. A date can tell you when a page was presented as current; it does not show how its entries were chosen or whether the underlying statements were checked. A fresh-looking page can still repeat old promotional language. I would look for substance, not the year in the heading.

I’m not going to dress up searches for Curacao casinos that accept Bitcoin or other crypto as a recommendation either. A payment label does not answer the separate question of whether the operator is suitable, and it does not make a site’s other claims self-proving. Keep those questions apart.

If you are comparing sites, slow down whenever the conclusion arrives before the reasons. Ask yourself who is making each claim, whether it is about this specific casino, and whether the page gives you anything solid beyond its own reassurance. If all you have is “best” in large letters, you have a slogan—not a verdict.

A list advertised as showing casinos outside the GamStop scheme should not be read as a recommendation to find somewhere else to play if you have chosen to exclude yourself.

Recommended online casinos

1. x3bet
   Bonus: Welcome Pack 100% Up to £1.000 + 200 Free Spins · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
2. EvoSpin
   Bonus: 125% up to €2500 + 125 Free Spins · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
3. NightLuck
   Bonus: Welcome Pack + 805% Up To 6400€ + 280 FS · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
4. BeOnBet
   Bonus: 100% up to €500 + 100 FS · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
5. Dieselwin
   Bonus: Welcome Pack 250% up to £4000 + 200 FS · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
6. Jetsetspins
   Bonus: 200% Bonus + 100 Free Spins + Free Royal Wheel · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
7. Zombillion
   Bonus: Welcome Pack 250% up to £4000 + 200 FS · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
8. Amunbet
   Bonus: Join now and get 450% up to 2,700 GBP + 450 FS · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
9. SpinFormula
   Bonus: 550% Up To £15,000 + 550 FS · Payout speed: 1-3 business days
10. Britsino
    Bonus: Welcome Package – Get your £2,200 + 2,000 FS · Payout speed: 1-3 business days

GamStop and the boundary it draws

GamStop is Great Britain’s national online self-exclusion scheme. Its job is to carry one exclusion across multiple participating online gambling websites and apps, rather than leaving you to approach each one separately. When you register, access to UK Gambling Commission-licensed gambling platforms is blocked for the fixed period you select.

That shared reach is the point. Self-exclusion is meant to put a barrier between you and gambling when you have decided you need one. Without a multi-operator scheme, a person might have to remember every account they had opened and contact each business in turn. GamStop applies across participating licensed services, so the boundary is broader than an account-by-account request.

I used to read bold labels as if they explained how a site worked. They don’t. “Non-GamStop” is a description of a relationship to the scheme, not a safety rating, a guarantee about access, or proof of what a particular casino does. The same goes for “Curacao” in a casino’s name or advertising: those words alone do not tell you whether that site is among the services covered by your GamStop registration.

The practical boundary is the participating online gambling platform. GamStop blocks access across participating licensed websites and apps, and a registered player is blocked from UKGC-licensed gambling platforms for the chosen fixed period. It is a multi-operator exclusion, not a general internet filter that prevents every gambling-related page from appearing on a screen. The distinction matters: seeing a site’s name or advert does not establish whether you can gamble there, and the scheme should not be treated as a tool that controls every gambling service on the internet.

Non-UK-Registered Casinos: Rules, Risks and Licences

That can make phrases such as “online Curacao casino” or “Curacao casino sites not on GamStop” sound more definite than they are. A search label is not the scheme’s coverage list. “Not on GamStop” does not, by itself, establish why a site is outside the scheme or what protections apply there. Nor does a casino’s own description settle the question. The dependable point about GamStop is its scope: it blocks access across participating licensed online gambling websites and apps, and registration blocks access to UKGC-licensed gambling platforms during the selected period.

It is also worth being precise about geography. GamStop is described as the national online self-exclusion scheme for Great Britain. In everyday conversation, people may say “UK” when they mean the whole country, but the scheme’s stated reach is Great Britain. That wording is more useful than assuming every service and rule has identical coverage across every part of the UK.

There is no ranking hidden inside the scheme. Searching for the best or top non-GamStop Curacao casinos does not tell you which sites GamStop covers, and the scheme does not certify a casino as a good alternative. A new casino using similar wording is no clearer on that point simply because it is new. The label answers a narrow question, at most: whether the site presents itself as being outside GamStop. It does not answer whether the site is suitable for someone who has chosen to exclude themselves.

GamStop Scope

GamStop blocks access across participating licensed online gambling websites and apps, and a registered player is blocked from UKGC-licensed gambling platforms for the chosen fixed period.

I know how tempting it is to treat a boundary as a technical obstacle: if one door closes, look for another. But GamStop is not just an inconvenience attached to an account. It is a deliberate, multi-operator barrier for the period selected. If you registered because gambling had become difficult to control, searching for sites described as outside the scheme can pull against the reason you set that boundary in the first place. No clever wording changes that.

The useful way to understand GamStop is neither as a badge on a casino nor as a promise that every gambling page will disappear. It is a shared online self-exclusion scheme whose reach covers participating licensed websites and apps, with registered players blocked from UKGC-licensed gambling platforms for their chosen fixed period. That is the line it draws. A site’s marketing label cannot redraw it for you.

What UK licensing does—and doesn’t—tell you

A licence can sound like a simple badge: someone has approved the casino, so it must be suitable for you. I used to give labels like that more weight than they deserved. The important question for a UK player is not just whether a site claims to hold a licence, but whether it is authorised to offer real-money gambling to people in Great Britain.

Remote gambling operators serving the British market must hold a licence from the UK Gambling Commission. A licence from another jurisdiction, including a Curacao licence for online casinos, is not a replacement for that UK permission. It may describe the operator’s claimed regulatory position elsewhere; it does not make the site a UK-licensed casino or bring it into the UK regulatory system.

Online casinos with no sister sites in the UK

That distinction matters because UK-licensed online operators have to participate in GAMSTOP. The Gambling Commission made participation compulsory for online operators from 31 March 2020. Since then, every UK-regulated online casino has been required to block players who have excluded themselves through the scheme.

So if a site is not part of GAMSTOP, that should not be read as evidence that it is a UK-regulated alternative. It points to a different regulatory status. Searches for Curacao casinos not registered with GAMSTOP, or for sites not blocked by it, can blur that difference: not being covered by the UK scheme does not establish that a casino is authorised to serve British customers.

I know how easy it is to treat “licensed” as the end of the decision. It is only the beginning. A foreign licence and a UK Gambling Commission licence are not interchangeable stamps, and a site’s use of the word “licensed” does not tell you that UK rules apply to it.

The boundary is regulatory, not a badge

People looking for a Curacao-licensed online casino may be trying to understand what protections apply, rather than simply collecting licence names. The practical point is that UK protections depend on the operator being within the UK regulatory framework. A Curacao licence claim does not by itself establish that connection.

Regulatory Gap

A Curacao licence is not a replacement for UK Gambling Commission permission and does not bring a site into the UK regulatory system.

This also means a Curacao-licensed casino list cannot be treated as a list of legal UK casinos just because the entries use licensing language. Nor does a casino being accessible from a UK device change the licensing requirement for an operator serving the British market. Availability and UK authorisation are different things.

I would be wary of the phrase “UK-friendly” when it is used as though it means UK-regulated. A site can describe itself in appealing terms, but those words do not alter which regulator governs its UK-facing gambling. The same goes for ratings: a positive rating is not a substitute for UK authorisation, and it does not show that GAMSTOP applies.

No clever wording. Just the distinction.

What GAMSTOP participation tells you

For a UK-licensed online casino, GAMSTOP participation is not an optional extra that the operator can choose to advertise or omit. It is a requirement of operating in the UK system. The scheme applies across participating licensed gambling websites and apps, so a self-exclusion registered through GAMSTOP is intended to block access across those UK-licensed operators.

That does not mean every site a person can find online is covered. The boundary follows the regulated operators, not every casino that accepts a visitor from Britain. If a site sits outside the UK system, the fact that GAMSTOP does not block it is not proof that it offers an equivalent safeguard. It means you should not assume the UK scheme governs that account.

Non-Gamban Casinos in the UK: What the Label Means

This is the part I would keep in view when reading claims about Curacao casinos not blocked by GAMSTOP. The absence of a block is not a mark of approval, nor evidence that a site is a legitimate UK alternative. UK licensing and GAMSTOP participation belong together: operators serving the British market need the relevant UK licence, and licensed online operators must participate in the scheme.

A foreign licence might be relevant to the operator’s position in its own jurisdiction, but it does not grant UK status. A Curacao licence for online casinos and a UK Gambling Commission licence answer different questions. Mixing them up can make a site sound safer or more appropriate for a UK player than its status warrants.

What this distinction cannot promise

UK licensing tells you which regulatory framework an operator is required to follow when it serves the British market. It does not mean that every casino elsewhere is covered by those requirements, or that a foreign licence gives you the same position as a UK licence. And a site’s claim about its licence is not, on its own, confirmation of what that claim means in practice.

I’m not saying a licence label tells you everything about how a business behaves. I am saying the jurisdiction matters before you treat the label as protection. If you are in Britain, a casino outside the UK licensing system should not be mistaken for a UK-regulated option simply because it describes itself as licensed.

That is the line worth keeping clear. A casino not covered by GAMSTOP is not thereby a regulated workaround.

Licensing and GamStop

• UK-licensed operators must participate in GAMSTOP.
• A foreign licence does not grant UK regulatory status.
• The absence of a GamStop block is not a mark of approval or a regulated workaround.

A licence claim is not a licence check

A casino may describe itself as licensed in Curaçao and display a badge, a regulator’s name or a licence number. Those details are claims made by the site. They do not, by themselves, establish that the licence is genuine, current, belongs to that operator or covers the gambling being offered to you.

I have learned not to treat a polished footer as proof. A name such as Curaçao eGaming may look official, but seeing it on a casino page does not verify the relationship between the operator and the licensing authority. Nor does a number become reliable simply because it is labelled “licence”. To confirm a particular site’s status, the claim would need to be checked against authoritative, current information. I cannot confirm an individual operator or provide a dependable checking procedure on the basis of a site’s own wording.

That distinction matters in the UK. A Curaçao licensing claim is not a UK Gambling Commission licence. Remote operators offering real-money gambling to customers in Great Britain must hold the relevant UK licence, wherever the operator is based. An offshore licence does not put a casino inside the UK regulatory system or make it a UK-regulated alternative. The badge may describe what the operator says about its status elsewhere; it does not change the UK requirement.

A list of casinos described as Curaçao-licensed has the same weakness if it simply repeats operators’ claims. A list can help you find names, but it cannot establish that each entry has a valid licence or that the licence details remain accurate. Dates, logos and copied descriptions can travel from one page to another. Repetition is not independent verification. It just looks reassuring.

So what can you sensibly take from a licence page? Treat it as a starting point for scrutiny, not a decision. Notice which legal entity the site names and whether its wording is specific, but do not assume those details are authentic or current just because they are presented neatly. If the site’s claims cannot be independently substantiated, you have no sound basis for treating them as confirmed. And even a genuine foreign licence would not answer the separate question of whether the operator holds the UK licence required to serve British customers.

Online Slots Not on GamStop: What to Check

There is no clever shortcut in a badge. I used to think the official-looking bits meant someone had already done the checking for me. That was wishful thinking. “Licensed” is a label until the underlying status is independently established, and it is not a substitute for the UK authorisation required for a casino serving the British market.

That is the line to keep in view when assessing any Curaçao casino licence claim: what the site says about an offshore licence is one thing; whether it is verified is another; and neither statement, on its own, proves UK licensing. If you cannot establish those points from authoritative information, do not turn an attractive badge or a directory entry into certainty. A confident claim is still only a claim.

Safety starts with what a casino must do

When I see a casino described as “safe”, I look past the label and ask what happens when someone asks to stop. For a UK gambling business, self-exclusion is not an optional extra: businesses must offer it. That matters more than a polished page about responsible gambling, because the test is whether the operator follows through once you make the request.

After a self-exclusion agreement is in place, the business must close your account, return any funds left in it and remove your details from its marketing databases. Those are separate responsibilities. Closing access but continuing to send promotional messages would not meet the requirement to remove your details from marketing; leaving money in the account would not deal with the requirement to return it.

There is more to it than pressing a button. The business must also take reasonable steps to prevent you from gambling after you have excluded yourself. A self-excluded customer should be refused service at the venue or website they excluded themselves from. In practice, the point is that exclusion has to mean something at the operator’s end, not just appear as a promise on a settings page.

“Responsible” can be a comforting word in casino marketing. I would not treat it as proof. I would look for clear self-exclusion instructions and pay attention to what the operator says will happen to the account, remaining funds and marketing contact. If those details are hard to find, that is a reason to pause rather than assume the safeguards are in place.

The same caution applies to Curacao casino safety claims. A Trustly or Paysafecard logo, if one is displayed, would tell you about a payment option being promoted; it would not establish how the casino handles self-exclusion, closes accounts or stops marketing. Nor does a payment name by itself confirm what protections apply to a particular operator. Keep the questions separate.

I also would not confuse an account-closure request with self-exclusion. If you want to stop gambling with a business, use its self-exclusion process and keep the confirmation. An ordinary request to close an account may not put the same restrictions in place. And if you have already self-excluded, do not take continued access or a new offer as a sign that gambling is safe; a business is supposed to take reasonable steps to prevent excluded customers from gambling.

These safeguards are a baseline, not a personal endorsement of any casino. A site’s own claims are not the same thing as seeing the required actions happen. Check the process before depositing, and if you decide to self-exclude, make the request explicit. Short version: promises aren’t safeguards.

Outside GamStop does not mean outside your exclusion

When you search for a Curaçao casino that is not on GamStop, it can sound as though you have found a separate lane with no connection to your decision to stop. That is the wrong way to read it. Self-exclusion is a formal agreement not to gamble, and you are responsible for sticking to it.

Do

• Stick to your formal agreement not to gamble
• Use self-exclusion to interrupt gambling patterns

Don’t

• Use non-GamStop sites as a workaround
• Open new accounts to bypass your own boundaries

An exclusion asks a gambling business to stop you betting with it for an agreed period. At the venues and websites you excluded yourself from, you should be refused service. Looking elsewhere does not undo that agreement or make gambling a safe workaround.

I know how tempting the loophole logic can be: “This one is outside the scheme” sounds like a practical answer when the urge is doing the thinking. But a site’s not being part of GamStop is not permission to disregard an exclusion you made. Playing at non-GamStop casinos could breach the terms of your self-exclusion. Don’t open another account elsewhere to get around it.

The distinction matters: your exclusion applies at the businesses you excluded yourself from, while a different site may sit outside that arrangement. That does not turn the choice to gamble into a harmless technicality. If you set the exclusion because gambling had become a problem, trying to find a way around it can pull you straight back into the pattern you meant to interrupt.

Gambling businesses must offer self-exclusion by law. That safeguard is there to help you stop access at the businesses covered by your request; it is not a promise that every gambling website will recognise a request made somewhere else. The search for Curaçao casinos not on GamStop in 2026 should not be treated as a route around your own boundary.

I have learned to distrust wording that makes a workaround sound like a fresh start. It isn’t. If you feel pushed to gamble despite having excluded yourself, step away from the account hunt and get support rather than testing whether another site will let you in. A new login can make the next bet easier, not safer.

Keep the agreement in view: you chose to stop, and the responsibility to stick to it remains yours. The fact that another site may not block you does not change that. No clever detour.

If you need to exclude yourself, cover every place

When I first thought about self-exclusion, I treated it like a switch: ask one site to shut my account and assume the problem was handled. It isn’t that simple. A request to one gambling business applies to that business; it does not automatically exclude you from every other place where you might gamble.

For online gambling, you can register with GamStop, which lets you make one request to exclude yourself from online operators covered by the scheme. Or you can contact an individual online casino and ask it to exclude you. That second route is narrower: it deals with that business, not your other accounts elsewhere.

Gambling businesses must offer self-exclusion. If you want to exclude yourself from one website or app, look for its Responsible Gambling or Safer Gambling page and follow the instructions. If you cannot find them, contact customer services. For a land-based casino, you can ask at the customer service desk. The practical point is to be clear about the places you want covered, rather than assuming one conversation reaches beyond the business you contacted.

Complete Your Exclusion

• Identify every online site or venue where you might be tempted
• Register with GamStop for multi-operator exclusion
• Contact individual casinos for sites not covered by GamStop
• Request exclusion at the customer service desk for land-based venues
• Wait for confirmation of each exclusion request

If you are considering a Curacao casino because it is not part of GamStop, pause before treating that as a solution. A search for a particular casino or payment option does not change the scope of an exclusion you have already made. Make a list of every online account and venue where you could be tempted, then use the appropriate exclusion route for each place not covered by your wider request.

I know how easy it is to focus on the one account in front of you and leave the rest for later. That gap matters. Check what each request covers, and do not assume that excluding yourself from one casino excludes you from a separate business. For online gambling, GamStop is the route for a multi-operator exclusion; contacting a casino directly is the route for excluding yourself from that particular business. For physical venues, make the request at the venue or use the relevant scheme for the places you want covered.

Cover every place. Not just the obvious one.

Payment names don’t establish UK protections

I used to treat a familiar payment logo as a small vote of confidence. It isn’t. Seeing Neteller, Skrill, Trustly or Paysafecard mentioned tells you only that a site is making a claim about a payment option; it does not establish that the method is available to you, that a deposit will work, or that the casino has UK protections. I would not assume any of those brands is accepted at a particular Curacao casino.

The important distinction is the rules that apply to the gambling operator and the payment route, not the name printed beside a cashier button. Remote gambling operators cannot take credit-card payments for gambling. That restriction also covers credit-card money routed through a money service business. A wallet is not a loophole: operators cannot accept a wallet payment for gambling if that wallet lets the customer use credit-card funds.

So if a site lists an e-wallet, the label alone does not answer how that wallet is funded or whether the operator may lawfully accept the payment for gambling in Britain. Nor does a deposit method turn an offshore casino into a UK-licensed one. Payment convenience and regulatory status are separate things. I learned that the hard way: familiar branding can make a page feel reassuring without answering the question that matters.

For Neteller or Skrill, check what the operator actually says about deposits and withdrawals, but don’t treat its own payment page as proof of UK authorisation or of a particular protection. The same goes for Trustly and Paysafecard. I can’t verify from the name alone whether a specific Curacao casino offers any of them, or what terms it applies. No logo can fill that gap.

There is another limit worth keeping in mind. A payment dispute and a gambling loss are not the same thing. The Gambling Commission cannot refund money you have spent gambling. If you are weighing up a payment route because you hope it makes a non-GamStop site safer, it does not. A familiar method is still just a method. The protections depend on the rules governing the operator, not the shine of the checkout page.

Payment Restrictions

Remote gambling operators cannot take credit-card payments for gambling, including credit-card money routed through a money service business.

Crypto claims need more than a casino label

A casino that mentions cryptocurrency may make the payment method sound like the main thing to consider. I used to focus on the feature being advertised and leave the harder question until later. That is backwards: the coin or token used to move funds tells you little about who is operating the site or what rules apply.

A Curacao label does not, by itself, show that a casino is authorised to serve people in Great Britain. Remote operators offering gambling to British customers must hold a UK Gambling Commission licence, wherever they are based. An offshore casino operates outside that UK regulatory system. The distinction matters more than whether a site accepts Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency.

Nor does a crypto option establish what safeguards a particular casino provides. A payment method is not proof of how the operator handles self-exclusion, account closure, customer funds or marketing. Those are separate matters. Promotional wording can make a site seem straightforward; it is not a substitute for knowing who is responsible for the gambling service.

I would treat “crypto casino” as a description of a payment feature, not a badge of safety or legitimacy. The same goes for a Curacao reference: it does not turn an offshore site into a UK-licensed casino. If you are already excluded from gambling, do not treat a crypto account elsewhere as a harmless workaround. It may conflict with the commitment you made to stop.

Crypto moves money differently. It does not change the basic question of whether the operator is permitted to offer gambling to UK customers, or make an offshore site part of the UK system. That distinction is easy to lose when the sales pitch is all about coins, speed or novelty.

The label is not protection.

A new casino is not automatically a safer one

I used to read “new” as “better”: a fresh site, a cleaner-looking page, maybe fewer problems than the places I already knew. That was wishful thinking. A launch date tells you when a business appeared, not whether it is suitable for you or meets the rules for serving people in Britain. A polished welcome offer is still advertising.

A new Curacao casino label does not, by itself, establish that a site can legally offer real-money gambling to people in Great Britain. Remote operators serving this market need a UK Gambling Commission licence. Nor does a site being new tell you how it would handle your account, personal information or an exclusion. I would not treat novelty as a safety check.

There is another trap: opening an account somewhere unfamiliar can feel like a clean slate when it is really another chance to gamble. If you have excluded yourself, do not use a new site to get around that decision. Self-exclusion is a formal agreement, and gambling businesses must offer it. The regulator cannot refund money you have spent gambling.

If gambling is tempting, make the exclusion practical rather than relying on willpower alone. First identify every online site or venue where you might be tempted. Register with the relevant scheme or business, provide the personal details needed to confirm who you are, choose the exclusion duration and wait for confirmation. For online gambling, you can register with GamStop or contact an individual casino; for a land-based casino, ask at its customer service desk.

One place is not everywhere. I learned that the hard way: an exclusion only covers the businesses you include in it. Make a list, cover every place you might return to, and do not let a new name or fresh design talk you out of that boundary. Keep it in place.

How long does it take for GamStop to become active after sign-up?

GamStop starts its 24-hour cooling-off period after your identity has been verified, and your exclusion is active during that period.

How does GamStop benefit me?

GamStop lets you block yourself, free of charge, from accessing or opening accounts with UKGC-licensed online gambling operators covered by the scheme.

How does self-exclusion work?

You identify the gambling sites or venues you want to exclude yourself from, provide information to confirm your identity, choose a period and receive confirmation. You can use GamStop for participating online operators or ask an individual gambling business to exclude you.

How do I return from self-exclusion?

To leave GamStop, contact the scheme directly and request removal; a 24-hour waiting period applies, and you can cancel the request during that time. After removal, it may take operators a further 24 to 48 hours to update your status.

What self-exclusion options are available at non-GamStop casinos?

You can request self-exclusion directly from an individual online gambling business, including through its Responsible Gambling or Safer Gambling page or by contacting customer services.

How does a non-GamStop casino handle self-exclusion?

When you self-exclude from a gambling business, it must close your account, return any funds in it and remove your details from its marketing databases. It must also take reasonable steps to stop you gambling with it.

Responsible Gambling