Fact-Checking Policy

Casinos.org publishes information people rely on to make real decisions about money and gambling, so getting the facts right matters. This policy explains what we check, how we verify it, and what we do when we cannot. It works hand in hand with our Editorial Guidelines and our Corrections Policy. Last updated: 15 June 2026.

Gambling content is the kind of information that can hurt people if it is wrong. A misstated licence can send a reader to an unregulated operator. An out-of-date bonus term can cost someone money. A misread law can put a reader on the wrong side of it. That is why we treat fact-checking as a core part of publishing, not a final tidy-up.

Before a review or guide is published, we verify the things that readers actually act on:

• Licensing and regulation: the operator’s licensing authority and licence status, and whether that licence is valid in the market we are writing about.
• Bonuses and promotions: bonus amounts, wagering requirements, minimum deposits, minimum odds, expiry windows and key terms.
• Payments: accepted methods, minimum and maximum limits, fees and realistic withdrawal times.
• Legal claims: what is legal, restricted or prohibited in a given country, checked against the law or the regulator’s published position.
• Facts and figures: any statistic, date, company detail or quote we publish.

We check facts against primary sources wherever possible, and we prefer the source closest to the truth. Licences are checked against the regulator’s own register. Bonus and payment details are checked against the operator’s live terms and conditions, not a press release or an old article. Legal positions are checked against the statute, the court judgment or the regulator’s notice. Where we can, we confirm a detail from more than one reliable source, and we record the source and the date we checked it.

Our preferred sources are gambling regulators and their public registers, operators’ own websites and terms, official statutes and court rulings, and our own hands-on testing. Where we cite data or news, we attribute it to a named, credible organisation such as a regulator, a court, or an established news outlet. We do not treat rival review or affiliate sites as a source of fact, and we never present another site’s rating or finding as our own.

Fact-checking is done by our editorial team, and material claims are reviewed by a second person before publication. The writer who tests an operator is responsible for recording what they find; an editor is responsible for confirming it stands up against the source. Using AI tools to assist does not change this: a human verifies every fact, because automation can be confidently wrong.

Facts go stale. Bonuses change, payment limits move, and laws are amended or overturned. We review and refresh our reviews and guides on a regular cycle, and we update affected content promptly when something significant changes, such as a new regulator decision or court ruling. When we make a substantive update, we revise the “last updated” date so you can see how current the information is.

If we cannot confirm a fact from a reliable source, we do not publish it as fact. We would rather leave a detail out, or clearly flag it as unconfirmed, than guess. This is a firm rule, and it applies even when an unverified detail would make a stronger story.

If you think we have published something inaccurate, please tell us. We will check it against the source and, where it is wrong, correct it under our Corrections Policy. You can reach us through our contact page.

Last updated:

15 June 2026