France Clarifies Evidence Rules for Gambling Fraud

France's gambling regulator has placed greater emphasis on evidence when licensed operators investigate suspected player fraud, setting out how businesses should handle affected accounts and remaining balances.

The Autorité nationale des jeux (ANJ) published its fraud guide on 31 August following consultations with licensed operators and the gambling mediator. The document is a soft-law measure and does not introduce new binding obligations. Instead, it addresses recurring questions from operators and aligns existing practices with the legal framework.

At the centre of the guidance is a distinction between suspicion and established fraud. The ANJ says operators should gather sufficient evidence before taking action affecting a player's money.

The guide states: “Characterising fraud requires the collection of probative evidence, and the operator cannot refuse to pay a win or return part or all of an account balance on the basis of mere suspicions, without undermining the binding force of the gambling contract.”

Account Action Depends On Proven Conduct

The ANJ's typology covers several forms of online account fraud, although the list is not exhaustive. Identity fraud, payment fraud, abusive chargebacks, game-related fraud and money dumping are among the cases addressed.

Where evidence establishes fraud, the guidance recommends closing the relevant account. Deliberate multiple-account fraud can result in every account belonging to the player being closed, including one held under their genuine identity.

Financial consequences require a separate assessment. In an identity-fraud case where the operator cannot establish that the destination bank account belongs to the player, French law allows the balance to remain in reserve. Other situations can require the return of funds not connected to fraudulent activity.

The guidance also cites court decisions to illustrate the evidence required in disputes.

In July 2025, the Paris Judicial Court ruled that Winamax had failed to demonstrate enough fraud to cancel five bets. The operator had to pay more than €402,000 relating to those bets and return €218.68 remaining in the player's account.

A February 2026 appeal involving Betclic produced a different result. The Paris Court of Appeal considered a shared IP address and terminal alongside 35 similar bets placed on the same days, with most made less than five minutes apart. A judicial officer confirmed that the records came from Betclic's systems without alteration. The court accepted the evidence supporting account closure, while requiring Betclic to return €32,785.30.

Verification Becomes An Earlier Concern

The issue extends beyond individual fraud investigations. France's gambling mediator received 1,856 requests during 2025, up 20% from the previous year. Sports betting represented 91.5% of admissible cases, while 42.4% involved account management.

The wider focus on verification also appears in Britain. On 12 August, the Gambling Commission reminded remote operators to complete identity checks “as early as practicable” after finding customers had registered with incomplete or inaccurate information.

The British regulator said more than a quarter of complaints reaching its contact centre concern identity verification. 

For operators, the French guidance sets a clearer evidential threshold for fraud decisions. For players, that threshold can determine whether winnings or remaining balances are paid during a dispute. 

Source:

“Lutte contre la fraude par les opérateurs de jeux d’argent et de hasard : un guide pour mieux traiter les cas de fraude”, anj.fr, August, 31, 2026