How We Review: What JILIGM Checks Before It Describes an Operator
We ask operators to put things in writing, so it would be poor form not to publish our own method. These are the checks behind every operator description on this site, the limits we admit to, and what happens to the text when money is involved. The answer to the last one is nothing.
The criteria
| Criterion | What must be findable | Consequence if it is missing |
|---|---|---|
| Licence disclosure | The licensed company's name and a licence identity, in the operator's own words | Nothing to match against a regulator's register, so the claim stays a claim |
| Payment rails | Named rails, and limits or timings written somewhere | Every limit becomes a surprise on withdrawal day |
| Terms clarity | Wagering, expiry and max-win clauses reachable from the offer | You discover the price of a bonus after paying it |
| KYC rules | Documents, stage, and the name-matching rule | The most common cause of a payout sitting pending |
| Complaint route | A named internal escalation and an external channel | A dispute with nowhere to go |
| Responsible-gaming tools | Deposit limits, reminders, cooling-off, self-exclusion | No brakes at the moment you need them |
| Support channels | What exists, the hours, and whether a written record is possible | No evidence when a decision is contested |
| App distribution | The hosting domain and what the install screen requests | Overlay or accessibility requests end the description |
Why it is all disclosure
Every criterion above asks a single question: has the operator written this down where a reader can see it before depositing? That is deliberate. A written statement can be held against a company, repeated, compared and quoted. A stranger's story about a fast payout can be none of those things. The method therefore rewards operators that publish inconvenient detail and marks down those whose sites are mostly artwork.
No scores, and nothing for sale
There is no score out of ten on this site, no stars, no ranking, no best list. Two reasons. A single figure hides the specific clause or missing page that costs a reader money, and a ranking creates a position that somebody would eventually try to buy. With neither published, the only thing we have to offer an operator is an accurate description, which is exactly the point.
What we cannot verify
- How long your withdrawal will take. It depends on your rail, your verification state and the operator's queue, and it is set by the operator — check its cashier page.
- Whether a licence is in good standing at the moment you read this. The regulator's own register is the live record.
- Anything inside your account, including limits or reviews applied to it specifically.
- Whether promotional terms have changed since publication, because operators edit them without notice.
- Whether a specific complaint was handled fairly, since we only ever see one side of it.
- What a session will do. RTP is a long-run average, not a forecast, and we publish no predictions.
Rules about numbers
- If the operator or the payment rail did not publish a number, it does not appear on this site.
- Public rail facts are fair: InstaPay is real-time with a per-transaction cap, PESONet settles in batches on banking days. Those belong to the rail, not to an operator.
- Operator-specific minimums, fees, payout windows and wagering multiples get the same sentence every time: set by the operator, so check its cashier page.
- No we tested claims, no undercover accounts, no timed payout trials.
- No invented bylines, because a fabricated reviewer would undo everything else here.
- Published game specifications, such as an RTP figure on a game's own information screen, are quoted as published and labelled as long-run averages.
Partner links
Some links leaving this site may be partner links, meaning a commission is possible when a reader opens an account. We disclose that because it funds the work, and because a reader is entitled to know. It changes no wording: nothing is added, softened, removed or reordered for money, there is no rate card, and since nothing is ranked there is no placement to sell.
Dates and corrections
Every page shows a published date and a modified date, and the modified date moves only when the text moves. We return to a page when an operator changes something we described, when a payment rail changes, when the regulator publishes something relevant, or when a reader shows us an error — and the correction goes into the page rather than into a quiet deletion.
What this site is
JILIGM is an independent guide, not a casino. No deposits are taken here, no balances are held and no games are run — the site exists to explain how verification, payments and apps work in this market so you can check them yourself. Gambling is restricted to adults aged 21 and over.
We are not a regulator, an adjudicator or a recovery service, and we cannot release anyone's funds. For a live problem the operator's own written support is the first step, and the regulator's published player-concerns channel is the escalation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is there no rating on your reviews?
Because a number out of ten hides the only detail that matters — which clause, which unwritten limit, which missing route is the risk — and a ranking would create a position an operator could try to buy. We publish what is disclosed and name every gap instead.
Do you earn money from the operators you write about?
Some outbound links may pay a commission if a reader opens an account, and we say so. It reaches none of the writing: no line is added or softened for money, there is no rate card, and nothing on the site is ranked.
Have you tested these casinos yourselves?
No, and we never claim to. Payout timing depends on your rail and verification state and is set by the operator, so we point to its cashier page rather than publish a figure we would have to invent. You will find no we deposited narratives here.
Can a reader repeat these checks?
Yes, in an evening and without depositing. The licence disclosure, the cashier page, the bonus terms, the verification page, the stated complaint route, the responsible-gaming controls and the support channels are all on the public side of a site.
What would stop you describing an operator at all?
A licence claim that cannot be matched to the regulator's register, bonus terms unreachable from the offer, no written complaint route, or an app that requests overlay or accessibility permissions. Any one of those ends it.
Why do the pages have no author names?
Because an invented expert with a photograph is precisely what this method replaces. The work is editorial, the pages are unsigned, and the checks above are the accountability — they are repeatable by anybody.