Casinos without GamStop are offshore sites holding no Gambling Commission licence, so they are not part of the UK's national self-exclusion scheme and the protections that come with a British licence do not apply to them. Taking a self-exclusion term does not license using them.
The pitch is easy to find and easy to dismantle. A handful of offshore operators advertise themselves as the answer to a scheme that cuts people off for six months, a year, five years. The words behind that pitch are not tricks of marketing alone, they are the searched phrases: casino without GamStop, online casino without GamStop, casino sites without GamStop exclusion. What the advertising rarely explains is the second half of the sentence. The Gambling Commission does not licence a British operator for its players and then shrug; it maintains an Illegal Markets team that hunts the sites that trade here without a licence, and the numbers it publishes are large enough to measure.
I have followed that team's quarterly outputs for years, and the thing that stands out is not the size of the black market. It is the gap between what disruption achieves and what it leaves behind. Sites get blocked at the registrar, pinned at the host, geo-blocked, stripped from Google. Traffic falls. Then the domains move, and a new one is bought for the price of a modest laptop.
What follows is what the law says about who commits an offence, what the enforcement figures actually show, how offshore licences differ from one another, and which signs tell a careful person that an operator is worth dealing with at all. As of 13.11.2026, the one comparison that matters most is not between brands but between licence regimes.
Table of Contents9
Offshore Sites Sit Outside the British Licence
The law here is not ambiguous, whatever the banners claim. Section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005 makes it an offence to provide facilities for gambling without an operating licence, and on summary conviction that carries up to 51 weeks' imprisonment, a fine at level 5, or both. For remote gambling the offence catches you if at least one piece of remote gambling equipment used is situated in Great Britain, or if the person providing the facilities knows or should know they are being used, or are likely to be used, here. It is immaterial whether the facilities are provided inside or outside the UK.
That last clause is the one the industry would prefer nobody reads. The Gambling Commission states plainly that it is illegal for anyone to offer commercial gambling services to consumers in Great Britain without a Commission licence, and that this includes an operator holding a licence somewhere else. The offence attaches to the provider, not to the adult customer, which is a genuine and often misstated distinction. Sections 47 and 49 confirm the pattern: the Act's general gambling offences fall on those who provide facilities, not on those who use them.
For a British-licensed site, the obligations stack up in ways a player notices. LCCP social responsibility code 3.5.5 requires licensees to participate in the national multi-operator self-exclusion scheme, and since 31 March 2020 that has been a condition of holding a licence at all. In April 2020 the Commission added a requirement to check the entire customer base for GamStop registration at least every 24 hours, which also stops registered people receiving direct marketing. Two operators, one licensee and Sportito, had their licences suspended on 3 April 2020 for missing the 31 March integration deadline. Offshore sites are not connected to GamStop and cannot see the register; the scheme's obligations apply only to UKGC-licensed operators. A trade source put it that way in December 2025 and it is consistent with the scheme's own terms of use, though rather more neatly stated by GamStop itself: it blocks access to sites licensed in Great Britain, and cannot prevent access to services run by organisations that do not participate. One small fact about the name, since it causes endless confusion: the scheme is often typed "gamestop", but it is written GamStop.
If self-exclusion is the thing in play, then it is worth stating exactly what it does. In November 2025 the scheme was renamed Gamstop Online after a website update, and the betting shop scheme formerly called MOSES became Gamstop Betting Shops. Registration blocks play with every online operator licensed in Great Britain for 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, or 5 years with auto-renewal. Signing up takes minutes; the block can take up to 24 hours to bite. Once registered, the term cannot be cancelled during the exclusion period, and it stays in place after the chosen period ends unless the person contacts GamStop to remove it. More than one in two of the 614,738 people on the register in July 2026 had chosen the maximum five years.
British licence conditions also govern the boring, protective parts of the experience, and the difference in what they cost an operator is worth naming. Under licence condition 17.1.1 a withdrawal request must not trigger a demand for further information the licensee could reasonably have requested earlier. Under 7.1.1 terms must not be unfair within the meaning of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Under 5.1.2, since 31 January 2024, a licensee may take payment from Great Britain customers only by a method whose provider is a payment service provider under the Payment Services Regulations 2017. Offshore sites operate under none of this. The Commission's own position is that it can only regulate sites that trade or advertise to customers in Great Britain and hold a licence; sites beyond that reach are a matter for disruption, not supervision.
What the Regulator Does About Unlicensed Sites
fastwithdrawalcasinos-uk.com looks at the offshore market from this end: not from what the sites promise, but from what the regulator manages to do to them, and what it admits it cannot.
The Commission's engagement figures are the honest place to start. Across 160 illegal gambling websites for which traffic data existed, disruption activity produced an average 32 per cent decrease in engagement. The method matters enormously, and the Commission says so itself. Registrar blocks and website suspensions produced the largest average fall, 91 per cent each; GEO IP blocking came in at 60 per cent; BIM removal 52 per cent, Google removal 30 per cent, Facebook removal 8 per cent. The Commission's conclusion is blunt: search-engine removal makes a site harder to find but does not fully block access, which is precisely why GEO IP blocking and registrar action beat it.
The volume is real, and it is not slowing. Since April 2024 the Illegal Markets team issued 3,140 cease and desist and disruption notices — 2,032 C&Ds, 774 registrar referrals, 402 host referrals and 3 payment provider referrals — while referring 447,778 Bing and Google URLs and securing 287,961 removals. In the quarter July to September 2026 alone it referred 1,835 websites, covering 7,677,211 URLs, and issued 546 cease and desist notices. Between April 2025 and March 2026, every single quarter recorded 0 or 1 prosecutions commenced: one prosecution, in October to December 2025. That is the sting in the tail. The regulator's toolkit is administrative, and its criminal route is almost vestigial.
The market it is chasing keeps moving. The Commission's dashboard recorded 586 illegal gambling websites accessible to GB consumers in September 2026, 4 per cent less than the previous three-month average but 4 per cent more than September 2025. Its affiliate-page method counted 364 sites in May 2024 and 535 by July 2025, once crypto-casino search terms were added to the methodology. Estimated time spent by GB consumers on illegal sites was 306 million minutes in January 2025, 116 million in June and 152 million in July. On the population survey published 5 November 2026, 0.6 per cent of all respondents had engaged with an illegal gambling website in the past four weeks and 94.4 per cent showed no indication of doing so, but among those who had gambled online in the past four weeks the figure was 2.5 per cent, plus 1.5 per cent in the past 12 months.
The police work is done elsewhere. Cease and desist notices go out, registrars and hosts get referrals, and since January 2025 the Commission has been reporting payment transaction data to the Visa Operator Scheme — which it describes as a critical and still early-stage part of its financial disruption strategy, with four referrals to date. In April to June 2025 it removed 84 illegal lottery URLs from social media platforms and referred 108 illegal lotteries. There is a taskforce now, too: the Illegal Gambling Taskforce's terms of reference were published by DCMS on 13 May 2026, with three priorities — cutting payments to and from illegal operators, tackling online advertising of illegal gambling, and improving cross-agency enforcement. It runs for 12 months and meets at least twice a year.
One warning notice deserves its own paragraph. On 20 January 2025 the Commission warned licensed operators about their casino games appearing on unlicensed websites available to GB consumers, noting that such sites often target customers who have self-excluded via GamStop and may have inadequate social responsibility and anti-money-laundering controls. That is the regulator describing the business model in its own words, and it should settle the question of what the appeal of these sites is built on. For anyone affected, the National Gambling Helpline on 0808 8020 133 is free, 24 hours a day, every day of the year, and reaches the same team by live chat and WhatsApp.
Four Licence Regimes Compared
Nine jurisdictions produce roughly nine different products, and the differences are not cosmetic. A licence is not a badge of quality; it is a statement of who supervises the operator, how much the operator paid, and who can be appealed to when something goes wrong.
| Licensing regime | Annual cost to the operator | Player dispute route | Self-exclusion link | Known strengths |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Great Britain (Gambling Commission) | Statutory levy of 1.1% of previous-year gross gambling yield for online operators | Approved ADR required; the operator must offer it free after eight weeks | GamStop registration checked at least every 24 hours | Withdrawal rules, fair-terms enforcement, funding protection disclosure |
| Malta (MGA) | EUR 25,000 fixed annual licence fee plus 5% gaming tax | Complaints form reviewed in English or Maltese; MGA publishes an Unauthorised URLs list | None tied to GamStop | Established EU regulator with a public warning list |
| Curaçao (CGA) | EUR 47,450 total annual B2C fee, payable in full by 15 January | Not specified in the licence framework | None tied to GamStop | Direct licensing since the LOK took effect on 24 December 2024 |
| Anjouan | EUR 17,828 for licence issuance and the same for annual renewal | Operator must appoint an approved ADR provider | None tied to GamStop | Published certificate register with QR verification |
| Kahnawà:ke | USD 20,000 annual CPA fee; application fee rising to USD 40,000 on 1 January 2027 | Full-time Dispute Resolution Officer | Own voluntary scheme, stated as permanent | Longest-running interactive gaming regulation, since 1999 |
Two rows deserve elaboration. The Gambling Commission's own regulatory settlement in October 2026 shows what supervision looks like in practice: one licensee, which runs seven websites, agreed to pay £900,000 for failures including unnecessarily delaying consumer withdrawals — a term allowing only one withdrawal request at a time, and manual review of every fifth or tenth withdrawal for some customers, both found unfair under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. That is a regulator with teeth. Meanwhile, Curaçao has spent two years rebuilding: the National Ordinance on Games of Chance took effect on 24 December 2024, the old master-licence model is gone, legacy "orange" sub-licence certificates ended on 15 October 2025, and supplier licensing becomes fully mandatory on 24 December 2026. An operator still displaying a historic /JAZ number or a legacy seal has not proved anything.
The offshore cost structures tell their own story about who is supervised and how closely. Kahnawà:ke permits exactly one Interactive Gaming Licence at a time, held by Mohawk Internet Technologies since 1999, and issues Client Provider Authorizations without a published cap; sites must be hosted in the Mohawk Territory. Anjouan charges EUR 17,828 and states its licences carry no territorial restrictions under Anjouan law, while requiring operators to comply with the laws of jurisdictions where they operate. That is a fair description of a licence sold as a product. Kahnawà:ke puts the position most candidly of the lot, and in a direction most of these sites do not want to discuss:
- A player who breaches a Kahnawà:ke self-exclusion prohibition forfeits any funds deposited or won to a third-party charity selected by the Commission. Its own voluntary self-exclusion is described as permanent and irrevocable.
Costa Rica, meanwhile, is not a regulator at all in this context. Costa Rica operates no comprehensive gambling licensing regime, and the "data processing license" the industry references is not a licence in the strict legal sense. A bill that would have created a mandatory licensing regime, No. 25,057, was rejected by the Legislative Assembly in early 2026. A site claiming a Costa Rican licence is claiming nothing.
How Offshore Payouts Actually Work
Withdrawals are where the licence question stops being theoretical, and the British benchmark is unusually well documented.
The Gambling Commission's data for June to September 2024 records 44.2 million withdrawals by customers of large online operators: 96.3 per cent cleared automatically, 3.5 per cent cleared within 24 hours and 0.1 per cent took up to 48 hours. Earlier data from some of the largest firms showed around 99 per cent of withdrawal requests approved, processed and fulfilled within 24 to 48 hours. That is not generosity; it is a regulated baseline. Reverse withdrawals were permanently banned by RTS requirement 14B on 31 October 2021 — "consumers must not be given the option to cancel their withdrawal request" — precisely because the reverse button gave engaged players a second run at their own money.
The complaints data shows where friction survives. Withdrawals were the number one topic raised with the Commission's contact centre, at around 2,000 complaints a year by July 2024. Coded complaints for "withdrawals and/or financial transactions" fell from 2,416 in the year to December 2022 to 1,791 in the year to December 2025. More than a quarter of complaints reaching the contact centre now concern identity verification, the standard grievance of being asked for documents only on attempting to withdraw — which licence condition 17.1.1 exists to prevent.
Under a British licence, the terms that make delay structurally profitable are prohibited. Operators may not impose a maximum limit on what can be withdrawn from the deposit balance; the Commission's own example of a banned term is "You may withdraw up to £50 per day and up to £500 per week". Un-staked deposits remain the customer's, and licensees may not confiscate any part of a deposit balance because identity or age verification was failed. Winnings left on an inactive account cannot be seized either. Customer funds must be held in a separate client bank account, with one of three published insolvency ratings disclosed in writing — though keeping funds separate still does not guarantee their return if the operator fails.
Offshore terms are built differently, and sometimes openly. A maximum cashout clause is the classic instrument: one offshore operator's published terms reserve the right to limit money withdrawable from bonus-generated winnings to 300 per cent of the credited bonus amount, with the excess voided. No British-licensed operator can impose that on a deposit balance, because the Commission's fair-terms guidance forbids the category. And where anti-money-laundering duties bite, a British operator must submit a Suspicious Activity Report and obtain a Defence Against Money Laundering from the National Crime Agency before moving funds back — a genuine cause of delay, which the Commission accepts, while insisting it does not create a right to confiscate deposits.
Payment method changes the picture less than the advertising suggests. Cryptocurrency settlement is decided by the chain, not the casino. Bitcoin's protocol targets ten minutes per block, but a block within any ten-minute window has only about a 63 per cent probability of arriving, rising to 95 per cent within 30 minutes; most merchants require six confirmations. Litecoin targets 2.5 minutes, though only about 55.43 per cent of modelled six-confirmation spans finish inside 15 minutes. A USDT transfer on TRON to a new wallet consumes about 130,000 energy, burning roughly 26 TRX without staked energy. On the bank side, Faster Payments has a £1 million scheme ceiling and over 90 per cent of transactions complete in under two seconds, while Jeton's UK schedule shows local bank transfers at 0 to 30 minutes with no sender or receiver fee. Fast rails do not compensate for a slow operator, and a slow operator has reasons a fast rail cannot fix.
Identity Checks
Ask why an offshore withdrawal stalls and the answer is almost always identification. It is worth knowing how the checks are meant to work, because the design is the tell.
In a British-licensed online casino, licence condition 17 requires the operator to obtain and verify identity — at minimum name, address and date of birth — before the customer is permitted to gamble. The Commission's stated expectation is that age and identity checks are brought forward to before a deposit or a stake, and it has criticised onboarding on partial information: initials instead of full names, nicknames, commercial addresses instead of residential ones. Under the money laundering regulations, remote casinos must carry out customer due diligence when a customer deposits or withdraws €2,000 or more, counting transactions that appear linked — including those forming part of a single logged-on session. A remote casino may identify at registration and defer full verification to the threshold, but it must be able to end the relationship if the customer cannot comply.
First time is the front-loaded version: an electronic check against credit reference or electoral roll data, often instant, with no documents needed at all. Later can mean a document request — a passport, driving licence or household bill — if circumstances change, if the account is higher risk, or if the pattern of play shifts. The Commission says it cannot give a timescale because the process varies. What it does say is that a withdrawal request must not be the moment new information is demanded if it could reasonably have been sought earlier, and that delaying a withdrawal over insufficient identity may breach licence condition 17.
The warning signs in an offshore context are worth naming, because they are structural rather than accidental. A check that appears only at payout, never at deposit or stake, is the delay mechanism rather than a compliance one. Source-of-funds demands with no stated policy on redacted documents — the Commission has not specified expectations about redaction, a gap operators exploit — tend to arrive at the least convenient moment. And the regulator's own risk assessment, published 30 July 2026, records an increase in the scale and sophistication of attempts to bypass due diligence with false documents, deepfake videos and AI-generated face swaps, alongside "smurfing": numerous low-level transactions to evade the €2,000 threshold. A customer of an offshore site has no protection from any of this, and no one checking the account data against the register. Fuzzy matching is the quiet failure the Commission worries about most: onboarding with a middle name instead of a forename creates mismatches with records held elsewhere — including GamStop — which is exactly how a self-exclusion quietly stops working.
Five Signs an Operator Can Be Trusted
These apply to any operator, but they bite hardest in a market where the licence is the only thing standing between a person and a withheld balance.
A Licence You Can Verify Yourself
A licence is not a logo, it is an entry on a register. The Commission's advice is to click through to the public register and check whether the site's activities and the domain names actually match what is listed — a licence for a different brand proves nothing. For Curaçao, click the Certificate of Operation seal and confirm it redirects to cert.cga.cw; if it differs in design or colour, the site is not authorised, and if the certificate behind it names a different domain, the site is showing somebody else's paperwork. For Anjouan, certificates carry a unique licence number and a QR code linking to the public register, and one that cannot be verified there should not be relied on. For Kahnawà:ke, clicking the Commission's logo generates a Certificate of Good Standing. A site with nothing to click is answering the question.
Terms That Read Like Rules, Not Traps
Read the withdrawal and bonus sections before depositing. A British-licensed operator cannot impose a maximum cashout on a deposit balance, cannot confiscate funds for failed verification, and cannot apply a "may, at our sole discretion" term to void winnings — the Commission treats such wording as unfair under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Since 19 January 2026, wagering requirements on bonus funds are capped at 10 times under social responsibility code 5.1.1, and mixed-product promotions requiring two or more gambling types are banned. A site offering 40 times wagering is not being generous, it is being offshore. Time limits, maximum bets while wagering and stake contribution charts are where the real terms live: one offshore operator's chart gives slots 100 per cent contribution but craps, live dealer games and its own jackpot games 0 per cent.
A Dispute Route With a Name on It
Complaints are the test of whether an operator answers to anyone. British licensees must let a customer refer a dispute to an approved ADR provider free of charge if it is not resolved within eight weeks; the approved list includes IBAS, eCOGRA, CEDR, ProMediate, ADR Group, Pegasus ADR, Blexr and the Tattersalls Committee. The published outcomes show a real process: eCOGRA's report for 1 October 2024 to 30 September 2025 records 911 disputes, 150 of them valid "Deposits & Withdrawals" cases, an average 31 days to resolve domestic disputes, and 17.8 per cent of completed disputes ruled for the consumer. IBAS recorded 3,721 domestic disputes in 2024-25, with 217 categorised as banking or financial, an average 20 days to complete, and 100 per cent operator compliance with decisions in the consumer's favour in both 2023-24 and 2024-25. Anjouan requires its licensees to appoint an approved ADR provider and to publish its details — the approved list currently runs to EGIS ADR, Axion ADR, iGaming ADR and another approved provider. A site with no named provider and no route beyond its own support inbox has already told you how a dispute will end. Note also what ADR will not touch: customer service complaints, or a refusal to accept a bet.
Funds That Are Separated and Labelled
Ask where the money sits before it is lost. British licensees must hold customer funds separately from business accounts and must publish one of three insolvency ratings — "not protected", "medium protection" or "high protection" — in writing, with the customer acknowledging receipt before using funds for gambling. An operator rated "not protected" must remind customers every six months. Keep the limits in view: money staked in an open bet is not customer funds at all, and separation does not guarantee return in an insolvency, with overseas bank accounts permitted. Anjouan's standards require segregation of player funds and certified random number generators, which is a reasonable minimum. A site whose terms never mention the word insolvency has not forgotten; it has decided.
Payment Rails You Recognise
Under licence condition 5.1.2, since 31 January 2024, a British licensee may accept payment from GB customers only through a method whose provider is a payment service provider under the Payment Services Regulations 2017 — one reason credit cards have been banned for gambling since 14 April 2020, with operators also required to ensure e-wallet deposits were not loaded from a credit card. Bank-level blocks now add another layer: the Commission's list, last updated 16 October 2026, names Bank of Scotland, Barclays, Halifax, HSBC, Lloyds, MBNA, Monzo, NatWest, Royal Bank of Scotland, Santander and Starling as offering gambling blocks applied at card level, so each card needs activating separately. Most use a 48 or 72-hour cooling-off period before gambling transactions resume, and blocks do not affect a credit score. An operator pushing one obscure rail, or a wallet load nobody can trace, is managing a problem rather than solving one.
A Practical Way to Check Any Operator
None of this requires technical knowledge, and none of it involves going near a VPN. Six steps, each with a reason.
- Find the licence and match the domain. Go to the Gambling Commission's public register and check that the site's activities and domain names appear. Reason: a licence held by a parent company for a brand nobody recognises does not cover the site being used, and the register is the only list that counts.
- Read the withdrawal section in full before depositing anything. Look for maximum cashout clauses, per-request limits, processing windows and identity conditions. Reason: these are the terms that decide whether a balance is real money or a sequence of promises, and they can only be judged before there is something at stake.
- Check the bonus terms against the 10 times cap and the mixed-product ban. Work out the wagering multiple, the time limit, the maximum bet while wagering and the contribution percentages by game type. Reason: since 19 January 2026 a British-licensed operator cannot set wagering above ten times or bundle two product types into one offer, so anything above that is a statement about where the licence comes from.
- Confirm the dispute route and its time limit. Establish whether the operator names an approved ADR provider, and whether the internal complaints process can be completed within eight weeks. Reason: a complaint that never reaches an adjudicator is not a complaint, it is a conversation with a company that has already decided.
- Turn on the free protections that do not depend on the operator. Install a blocking tool — BetBlocker states it blocks over 1,368,000 gambling websites and 3,100 apps free worldwide with no registration, and Gamban blocks licensed and unlicensed sites alike, free in Wales but £4.99 a month or £29.99 a year in England and Scotland now that TalkBanStop funding ended on 31 March 2026. Add the bank block on each card. Reason: these work on the device and the account rather than on the site's goodwill, and they are the only layer that follows a person across a dozen new domains.
- Write down the numbers that matter, and use them. Keep the National Gambling Helpline (0808 8020 133, free, 24 hours a day), and know that GamCare runs it with live chat and WhatsApp. Reason: the practical value of any of these checks is that the help exists before it is needed.
One thing a careful person should not do is treat any of this as a way around a self-exclusion term. It is not one. A GamStop registration holds for its full term and stays in place afterwards until the person contacts GamStop to remove it, and the Commission's own warning notice of 20 January 2025 says plainly that unlicensed sites targeting GB consumers often aim at people who have self-excluded. Kahnawà:ke's rule that a self-exclusion breach forfeits deposited and won funds to charity is one offshore regulator's answer to the same problem, and it is a more honest one than the marketing.
Questions About Casinos Without GamStop
Are casino sites without GamStop legal in Great Britain?
Providing gambling facilities to consumers in Great Britain without a Commission licence is an offence under section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005, with the offence falling on the operator rather than the adult customer. The Commission states this includes operators licensed elsewhere. So the site is acting unlawfully; a player using it has no British licence protection, no ADR entitlement and no route to the Commission to recover money.
Can an online casino without GamStop see my self-exclusion?
No. GamStop is a British multi-operator scheme and only participating operators check the register; the Commission requires licensees to check their entire customer base at least every 24 hours, a requirement that has applied since April 2020. Offshore sites are not connected to it and cannot see registrations. That is exactly why the Commission's January 2025 warning notice says such sites often target self-excluded customers.
Do online casinos without GamStop pay out faster?
Not as a rule, and the claim rests on nothing checkable. Disruption figures show how little can be verified about these sites, and offshore terms routinely include maximum cashout clauses — one operator caps withdrawals from bonus winnings at 300 per cent of the bonus credited, voiding the rest. Where an offshore site does pay quickly, it is because nothing is being verified, which is a different problem from a fast payout.
What about pay by phone bill casinos without GamStop?
It is the same comparison with a worse footing. A British licensee may take payment from GB customers only by a method whose provider is a payment service provider under the Payment Services Regulations 2017, which is why mobile billing is tightly constrained in the licensed market and credit cards have been banned since 14 April 2020. An unlicensed operator taking payment through a phone bill leaves a customer with no chargeback route, no ADR provider and no regulator to complain to.
Are live dealer casinos without GamStop any safer?
No. A live dealer studio is a supplier, not a licence. The Commission warned licensed operators in January 2025 about their casino games appearing on unlicensed websites available to GB consumers. Offshore sites can source the same tables while sitting outside every British requirement on fair terms, funding separation and identity checks, so the felt of the table tells a player nothing about who is holding the money.
What does the regulator actually do about these sites?
Disruption rather than prosecution, on the published evidence. Since April 2024 the Illegal Markets team issued 3,140 cease and desist and disruption notices, referred 447,778 search URLs and secured 287,961 removals. Engagement fell an average 32 per cent across 160 sites, with registrar blocks producing 91 per cent falls against 30 per cent for Google removals. Between April 2025 and March 2026, one prosecution was commenced.
The Sum of It
Casinos without GamStop are not an alternative route through a self-exclusion term; they are unlicensed sites sitting outside the British licence regime altogether, and the regulator's own figures show a market that is disrupted constantly and replaced just as quickly — 1,835 websites referred to search engines in a single quarter, and one prosecution commenced across a whole year. A GamStop registration holds for its full term and beyond it, until the person contacts GamStop to remove it, and no offshore site changes that. The National Gambling Helpline is on 0808 8020 133, free, 24 hours a day, every day of the year.