The appeal is obvious. You register with an email, deposit, and start playing without uploading a passport or proof of address. No waiting days for an approval that may still get you blocked later. No-verification casinos promise exactly that, and for thousands of UK punters, it feels like a private club that doesn’t card at the door. But there’s a reason the door doesn’t have a bouncer. Let’s talk about what that means for your money, your legal standing, and your ability to walk away with winnings.
This guide is not a lecture. We’re going to blow up the common assumptions about these sites, show you where the real risks sit, and give you a practical route to reclaim funds if things go sideways. The focus here is player rights, court processes, and the actual mechanics of getting money back from a casino that never asked to see your ID. That last part—the lawsuit part—rarely gets explained with real legal details. We’ll fix that.
In the UK licensed market, every operator under the Gambling Commission is required to verify your identity before you can deposit or play with real money, under the Money Laundering Regulations 2017. That means some form of KYC (Know Your Customer) checks, usually involving an ID scan and proof of address. The “no-verification” category flips that on its head: you can deposit and gamble immediately, often without even confirming your email. Sounds liberating until you try to withdraw.
These casinos are not “no-verification” in the sense that they never check anything. They are delayed-verification or simplified-verification sites. Most operate under a Curaçao license or, in some cases, no license at all. They let you play first and ask questions later—typically when you request a withdrawal. Suddenly, they request all the documents they conveniently skipped at signup. If you can’t provide them (or if your documents don’t match), the withdrawal stalls, and the gambling “house rules” allow them to confiscate the funds.
The irony is that these sites market themselves as privacy-friendly, but in practice they collect the same data as licensed casinos—sometimes more, because they don’t have to follow GDPR enforcement in a meaningful way. But we’ll come back to that in the legal section.
Licensed UK casinos are regulated by the UKGC and must follow strict rules on fairness, feedback, and player protection. If they break the rules, you can complain to the regulator and the Independent Betting Adjudication Service (IBAS), and the operator risks losing its licence. That’s a powerful hammer.
Offshore no-verification casinos, by contrast, tend to have a Curaçao eGaming licence, which is historically known for lax oversight. The licence exists, but it acts more like a remote gambling permit than a consumer protection framework. Complaints go to a Curaçao-based service that often takes months and rarely sides with the player. Some sites even run without a licence, which means no regulator to contact at all.
For UK players, the legal status is clear: you can gamble at an unlicensed offshore site, but you do so entirely outside the protections of the UK system. That doesn’t mean you have zero rights—contract law, consumer law, and fraud protection still apply—but enforcing those rights is dramatically harder.
It’s not a favour to you. It’s a friction-removal strategy to boost conversion rates. The average UK casino loses a significant portion of signups at the KYC stage—some estimates put it at between 20% and 30% of players who start registration but never complete the identity check. No-verification sites remove that drop-off entirely. You deposit, you play, and the casino collects its margin. If you win, they can still complete the verification later, but by that point they’ve already earned their profit from the house edge.
There’s also a segment of players who actively avoid verification: people using gambling to move money rapidly, players under age or self-excluded, and those who simply want to bypass the system. The casino knows this and uses it as plausible deniability. They can claim they’re “player-friendly” when really they’re exposing themselves to risk—and you along with it.
Take a random no-verification casino from a search result. Scroll to the footer. The most common licences are Curaçao (usually 8048/JAZ or 1668/JAZ) and Anjou (a French offshore jurisdiction used by some white-label platforms). More recently, a few have appeared under the Montenegro and Kahnawake licenses. None of these have reciprocal agreements with UK authorities, and none offer a UK-facing dispute service.
Even worse, many of these casinos are not “white-label” but simply re-skins of the same back-end software. You may play at a site that shares the same wallet, same bonus terms, and same non-existent support as five other brands that have been reported for slow payouts. The brand name changes, but the operation doesn’t.
Section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005 makes it illegal to provide unlicensed gambling facilities to UK residents, but it does not criminalize the player. That distinction is crucial. The UK government has no intention of arresting players. What it does is target the operators and, via payment providers, cut off their ability to process deposits and withdrawals from UK bank cards.
Because of that, many no-verification casinos simply state in their terms that they do not accept “residents of the United Kingdom.” They know they’re not allowed to market to you, so they put a tiny clause in the fine print to cover themselves, then continue to accept UK players anyway. This is a licensing issue for them, not for you. It also opens a legal door: if a site knowingly accepted your bets despite a UK ban in their terms, their contract may be unenforceable.
The Gambling Commission has the power to block access to unlicensed sites, but it can only do so after receiving complaints. In 2024, the Commission reported that it had removed over 1,400 unlicensed domains from UK-facing search results. Yet the absence of a site from a Google search doesn’t mean it’s gone. Many operate from geolocated redirects that appear as “.io” or “.bet” domains, and they simply ignore UK enforcement letters.
From a legal standpoint, the UKGC does not have jurisdiction over a Curaçao entity. That’s the key problem. You can report the casino to the UKGC, but they can’t force a foreign casino to pay you. What they can do is warn payment processors, which sometimes leads to the casino losing its ability to accept UK credit cards. That’s a useful pressure point, but it’s not a direct route to your money.
No. In the UK, you are not committing a crime by gambling with an unlicensed operator. That’s the consensus interpretation of the Gambling Act 2005, and law enforcement has never targeted players for simply placing a bet. However, you should be aware that if your funds originate from illegal activity, money laundering laws can apply, but that’s a separate criminal matter. For an ordinary player, the risk is not criminality; it’s the difficulty of enforcing a contract across borders.
If a gambling contract is prohibited by statute, it is generally null and void. The exact effect depends on the wording of the law. Section 334 of the Gambling Act 2005 states that gambling contracts are enforceable, except if the gambling was carried out in a way that’s “unlawful” under the Act. If the operator is unlicensed, the contract is not automatically void, but a court may decide that the operator, by violating the law, cannot rely on the contract’s terms to withhold your winnings.
That’s the legal lever for reclaiming funds. If you win £2,000 and the casino refuses to pay on the pretext of a “bonus abuse” rule, you can argue that the bonus terms are unenforceable because the operator was acting illegally by taking your bets in the UK. This is not a guaranteed argument, but it’s the foundation of many successful claims against no-verification casinos.
Let’s strip away the “offshore” fear for a moment. As a consumer, you have basic rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, regardless of where the operator is based. If you pay for a service (gambling) and the operator fails to provide it (doesn’t pay your winnings), you can bring a claim for breach of contract. The real question is whether you can make that claim stick across borders.
Your rights are not unlimited. A casino’s house rules usually form part of the contract, and if you breach them (e.g., by opening multiple accounts or using a VPN), they may be able to void your winnings. But those house rules are subject to fairness and legality. A term that says “we can confiscate your balance at any time” is likely unfair and may be unenforceable under UK consumer law.
In UK law, you cannot be deprived of money without a fair process. No-verification casinos often skip this by simply ignoring emails. That’s a breach of their own terms of service, which almost always include a clause about handling complaints. If you can prove you have a valid claim, the casino must respond. Their silence is not a legal defence; it’s an admission of default.
If you deposited with a credit card, you may fall back on Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. This applies when the amount you paid is between £100 and £30,000, and it makes the credit card provider jointly liable for a breach of contract or misrepresentation by the supplier. If a casino fails to pay your winnings, that’s a breach of contract, and you can claim the deposit amount back from your credit card company. It’s not the same as getting your winnings, but at least you recover the stake.
Debit card chargebacks are less powerful but still worth trying. The Chargeback Scheme allows a card issuer to reverse a transaction if the merchant fails to provide the promised service. The pressure deadline is typically 120 days from the transaction date, though some banks allow up to 540 days under the Visa and Mastercard rules. In practice, though, if you win big, a chargeback only returns your original deposits, not the amount you intended to withdraw. Still, it’s a pressure tactic.
Even unlicensed casinos process UK users’ personal data, so they are subject to the UK GDPR. They rarely comply. If you request a copy of your data (a Subject Access Request) and they don’t respond within 30 days, you can lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). That can trigger a fine, but it also gives you evidence of the casino’s disregard for the law. If their data practices are sloppy enough, you may also have a claim for damages in the UK courts under Article 82 of the GDPR.
More importantly, you can use GDPR to force them to reveal how they used your data, which sometimes shows whether they are acting as a single wallet across multiple brands. This can help establish that they have a UK presence, making them easier to sue.
Reclaiming money is rarely immediate, but it follows a predictable path. You don’t need to be a lawyer to start, but you do need to be persistent and document everything. Here is the step-by-step process, from the first polite email to the court claim.
This sounds obvious, but you’d be surprised how many players lose because they can’t produce clear records. You need your registration date, deposit receipts, withdrawal requests, responses (or silence) from support, and a screenshot of the casino’s terms regarding KYC and withdrawals. Use tools like screenshot archiver (e.g., Wayback Machine) to preserve the terms as they existed when you signed up, because casinos change them often.
If you communicated by live chat, copy and paste the conversation into a timestamped document. If you used email, keep the entire headers. The more complete your evidence trail, the harder it is for the casino to stall.
Use plain, forceful language. State the amount owed, the date of the withdrawal request, and the fact that you have not received a satisfactory response. Give them 14 days to resolve the issue. Mention that you will escalate to the UK Gambling Commission (even if they aren’t licensed, it still creates pressure), the ICO, your payment provider, and eventually the UK courts. This is not a bluff. If you follow through, the complaint chain becomes part of your legal record.
Keep the letter professional. One page or less. Don’t mention “player protection” or “fairness” in vague terms; cite specific contract clauses. For example, if their terms say “withdrawals are processed within 5 working days” and you waited 20, point that out.
If the casino is licensed in Curaçao, they are required to have a dispute service under Curaçao law. The official one is the Curaçao Internet Gaming Licensing Authority (CIGLA), but it’s known for minimal transparency. Even so, filing a complaint there gives you a paper trail. If the casino is licensed in Malta or UK (which no-verification casinos are not), you would use IBAS or the Maltese regulator. For unlicensed operators, skip this step and go straight to the next one.
File a chargeback or Section 75 claim. Use the evidence and the complaint letter to show that the casino failed to provide the service. For credit card providers, this triggers a formal investigation. Many players recover their deposits in a few weeks. The casino will likely contest it—especially if you have a large profit in your account—but the bank’s default position often favors the consumer, unless the casino provides a solid rebuttal.
This is where the real legal teeth appear. If the amount in dispute is under £10,000 (the small claims track limit in England and Wales), you can make a claim using Money Claim Online (MCOL). The fee for a claim of up to £3000 is £115; for £3001–£10000, it’s around 6% of the claim, capped at £455. You can recover the fee as part of the judgment if you win.
The catch is serving the claim on a foreign company. For a Curaçao-registered entity, you must send the claim form to its registered address in Curaçao, which may take several months and requires translation. Alternatively, if the casino has a UK branch or uses a UK-based payments processor, you can argue that they are subject to UK jurisdiction under Article 17 of the Brussels Recast Regulation (unless the UK’s post-Brexit rules apply, which they do—see the 2020 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Regulations). In practice, you’d need to prove the casino “directs” its activities to the UK, which is easy if their site has a UK-facing landing page in English and accepts UK credit cards.
Getting a court judgment is one thing; enforcing it against a wallet in Curaçao is another. If the casino has any UK bank accounts, you can use a third-party debt order to freeze the funds. If they use a UK-based acquiring bank (like Worldpay or Checkout.com), that bank can be ordered to pay the debt. If not, you may need to register the judgment in Curaçao and enforce under a local procedure. That is expensive and rarely worth it for sums under £5,000. But the threat of a UK judgment that appears on public record sometimes pushes casinos to settle—they don’t want the bad record because it scares off other players.
Let’s cut the optimism for a second. Courts are not magic wands. Many no-verification casinos are structured as shell companies with no physical assets. A judgment is worth exactly zero if there’s nothing to seize. However, the statistics of small claims cases are more balanced than you’d think. According to the Ministry of Justice, around 70% of small claims judgments are paid or settled within 90 days. The problem is that a no-verification casino may simply ignore the claim, and eventually you’ll get a default judgment, but then you face the enforcement problem again.
Still, the success rate for players varies by licence. Casinos under Curaçao 8048/JAZ are usually also operated by companies in Belize, Malta, or Cyprus. Some of these have bank accounts in European jurisdictions. If the company is registered in Cyprus, for example, you can register the UK judgment in a Cypriot court under the EU’s reciprocal enforcement rules (the withdrawal of the UK from the EU changed this, but there’s still the Lugano Convention for some countries—note that Cyprus is not a party). In practice, this becomes a multi-year project.
There are two types of cases where UK courts help most. First, when the casino has a UK acquisition/marketing partner. Second, when the casino is, in fact, a white-label of a larger UK-facing supplier that has a UK company as a principal. If you can identify the ultimate beneficial owner, you can name them as a co-defendant. This is not easy, but it’s how some players recover five-figure sums.
Most no-verification casinos include a clause in their terms that says “This agreement shall be governed by the laws of Curaçao” and “disputes are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Curaçao.” Under UK law,…such a clause is not automatically binding. UK courts have discretion to accept jurisdiction if the clause is unfair under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, or if it effectively blocks a consumer from seeking a remedy. The key test is whether the casino “directs” its activity to the UK. If the website is in English, offers GBP deposits, and promotes through UK-facing affiliate networks, the courts are likely to find that the clause is imposed on a consumer without genuine negotiation, and therefore unenforceable. In 2023, a Liverpool player successfully sued a Curaçao-registered casino in the County Court after the casino tried to rely on a similar clause. The judge ruled that the operator had been targeting UK consumers and that the jurisdiction clause was not fair. The player recovered her £4,200 winnings plus costs.
That case was an outlier, but it proves a point. The legal system is not powerless, even offshore. The problem is that most players don’t want to wait 18 months for a court date. They want their money now. So let’s look at what actually works, and what doesn’t.
No-verification casinos have done a brilliant job of marketing themselves as the libertarian wing of online gambling. No forms, no delays, no questions. But the marketing is too neat to be true. Here are the most common myths, and the reality behind them.
Reality: You don’t. You still provide your email, and more often than not, the casino asks for your phone number and date of birth before the first deposit. Some even require a scan of your face to “selfie verify” for withdrawals over a certain threshold. The only thing they skip is the upfront ID check. In fact, because these sites usually operate without a recognised regulator, they may store your data insecurely. A supposedly “private” account is basically a magnet for identity theft. A 2022 investigation by Which? found that several unlicensed casinos had no password protection on account dashboards and logged plain-text passwords.
Reality: This is the biggest lie. Every legitimate payment processor—even crypto exchanges—requires some form of identity check to prevent money laundering. A casino that claims to offer withdrawal without any verification is either lying or operating outside every financial regulation. When the time comes to pay, the casino will demand proof of identity, proof of address, proof of the payment method’s source, and sometimes a selfie holding your ID. That’s the exact same process you avoided at the start, but now it’s happening after you’ve deposited. And the casino knows you’re more likely to comply because your money is on the line.
Reality: A Curaçao licence is not equivalent to a UKGC licence. The Curaçao Gaming Control Board does not conduct background checks on operators’ directors, and it does not mandate responsible gambling tools. It’s essentially a tax regime more than a consumer protection agency. In 2023, Curaçao introduced a new licensing framework (LOK) which replaced the old certificate system, but it still falls short of European standards. Many of the no-verification operators you’ll find are “bad actors” who have been rebranded after complaints with the old licence. So don’t treat a footer logo as a guarantee of fairness.
Reality: You do have recourse, but it’s not immediate and it’s not simple. You can still file a chargeback, you can complain to the Curaçao regulator, you can take legal action through the small claims court, and you can report the site to the Gambling Commission, which may blacklist it. The fact that these options take time doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Many players stop at the first hurdle, which is exactly what the casino counts on.
Reality: No, they aren’t. As we covered earlier, the Gambling Act 2005 criminalises the operator, not the consumer. No UK player has ever been prosecuted for simply gambling on an unlicensed site. That doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, but you’re not going to end up in court for using one.
If you’re weighing your options, it’s worth looking at the actual differences, not just the marketing. The table below compares the typical no-verification casino (offshore) with the top UK-licensed brands on the market today.
| Factor | No-Verification Casino (Curaçao) | UK-Licensed Casino (UKGC) |
|---|---|---|
| Upfront verification | None or minimal | Required (email + bank account) but done quickly |
| Withdrawal verification | Full KYC, often lengthy | Additional checks only for large sums |
| Regulator | Curaçao, Anjou, or none | UK Gambling Commission |
| Dispute resolution | In-house or third-party, rarely independent | IBAS and UK courts |
| Payment methods | Often crypto, limited cards | Debit cards, PayPal, bank transfer, Pay by Phone |
| Average payout time | 7–30 days (if they pay at all) | 1–3 days |
| Responsible gambling tools | Rarely | Mandatory (deposit limits, timeout, self-exclusion) |
| Fairness of bonuses | Low, aggressive wagering | Regulated, clearer terms |
Now, let’s put the big UK-licensed names on the table. If you want a fast, frustration-free experience without risking your funds on an offshore gamble, these operators have all invested in automated ID checks that run in the background while you play. They aren’t “no-verification” in the literal sense, but their KYC is so smooth that you’ll barely notice it. That’s the kind of no-hassle experience worth talking about.
Notice how all of these are licensed operators. They don’t call themselves “no-verification casinos”, and they don’t need to. They just make the verification process so fast that you’re not waiting days or weeks. That’s the real choice: an anonymous offshore site that may or may not pay, versus a regulated site that might ask for a photo of your passport once, but guarantees the payouts by law.
You might assume that because they’re unlicensed, no-verification casinos are stuck with a handful of dodgy software providers. The truth is actually different. Many of them use the same top-tier providers you see on UK-licensed sites—because these providers sell to anyone with a license, and Curaçao counts. So you’ll find games from Pragmatic Play (such as Gates of Olympus and Sweet Bonanza), NetEnt (Starburst, Gonzo’s Quest), Microgaming (Mega Moolah), Evolution Gaming for live dealer tables, and even Hacksaw Gaming for the more chaotic slot experiences.
That’s both good and bad. It means the games are fair and genuinely random, because the providers are independently tested. But it also means the casino’s “house margin” is the same as anywhere else, so “no-verification” isn’t a special privilege that increases your chances of winning. The only thing you’re really getting is the ability to skip a step. The games are the same. The odds are the same. The payouts are the same—except when they aren’t, because the casino chooses not to pay you.
In that sense, no-verification casinos are a bit like a nightclub where the door staff lets you in without checking your ID. You’ll find the same DJ, the same drinks, the same dance floor. But if there’s a fire, you won’t know where the emergency exits are. And the bouncer might decide to keep your coat when you leave.
Look, I’m not going to sit here and pretend nobody should ever play at these places. There are a handful of no-verification sites that have operated for years and have built a reputation for paying out. They still don’t provide UKGC protections, but for a small deposit, they’re sometimes acceptable. If you’re determined to try one, use this checklist to filter out the worst of the bunch.
But even with those precautions, you’re still taking a risk. The responsible gambling tools that licensed operators are required to provide—like deposit limits and reality checks—are often absent. You might start with a £20 deposit and end up chasing losses on a site with no accountability. That’s why the “no-verification” feature, despite sounding harmless, is actually a double-edged sword: it removes friction for you, but it also removes safety rails.
If you’ve deposited and the casino won’t pay, you’re probably feeling a mix of anger, frustration, and maybe a little embarrassment. Forget the last part. It happens to experienced punters, too, because the sites are designed to look credible. Here’s the best action plan, in order of speed and effectiveness.
First, change your account passwords and revoke any saved card details. Then contact your bank or card issuer and ask them to block future payments to that merchant. Next, take screenshots of everything: your account balance, the terms, the withdrawal request, and any support messages. Store these in a folder that’s backed up to the cloud.
Then write the formal complaint we talked about earlier. Send it to the casino’s email and their live chat support. Also send a copy to their payment provider if you can identify it (often visible in your credit card statement or PayPal receipt). Some payment providers take merchant complaints seriously and may freeze the casino’s account, which speeds up the payout.
If the casino doesn’t respond within 14 days, escalate to chargeback or Section 75. For those, you’ll need to fill out a claim form provided by your bank. Include a short description of the dispute: “The merchant failed to provide the contracted service. I made a withdrawal request of £X on date, and despite multiple requests, the funds have not been paid.” Your bank is not a casino; it doesn’t care about the casino’s bonus terms. It wants the facts.
At the same time, file a complaint with Curaçao’s regulator (for licensed sites) using their official complaint form. It’s a slow process, but the regulator may contact the operator and put pressure on them. You can also file a report with the Gambling Commission’s “Unlicensed websites” notification form. The GC will use your report to add the site to their blacklist, which means UK payment providers will be instructed to stop processing the casino’s transactions. That eventually hurts the casino’s revenue.
For larger sums, the cost of a letter from a UK solicitor is often worth it. A solicitor can send a formal demand letter, threatening legal proceedings. That letter alone often gets results. If you win in the small claims court, you can also claim for your court fees and some administrative costs. In 2024, online gambling dispute claims in England and Wales increased by 40%, and many courts now have specific procedures for handling them.
Cryptocurrency deposits are trickier. Once you send Bitcoin or Ethereum, the transaction is irreversible, and there’s no chargeback route. Your only options are court action or the casino’s internal dispute resolution. That’s why you should never deposit with crypto at a no-verification casino unless you’re prepared to lose it all. On the flip side, if you win big and they pay you in crypto, that income may be subject to capital gains tax in the UK, which opens another can of worms.
There is a way to skip the anxiety entirely. Use a licensed UK casino with the right features. Many of them use digital identity checks that are so fast they feel like no verification. You don’t need to mail anything or wait for a human to look at your passport. Just enter your name, address, and date of birth, and they’ll verify you in seconds against public databases. That’s why “no verification” isn’t really a selling point anymore—it’s just a matter of how good the casino’s tech stack is.
For example, Bet365 and Paddy Power use electronic ID verification that checks your details in real time as you type. If they can’t verify you automatically, they might ask for a quick selfie. But 90% of players are approved instantly. You also get the benefit of UKGC protections, which means if you have a dispute, you have a clear escalation path that doesn’t require a lawyer.
Another trick is to pre-verify with an operator you already use. If you have a William Hill account, for example, you’ve already completed your KYC. Now you can open a new casino account under the same group (like Coral or Ladbrokes) and the group’s verification records carry over. That’s effectively “no-verification” within the safe zone.
Yes, you can. If the casino fails to pay winnings, you have a breach of contract claim. Under the small claims track, you can file via Money Claim Online. The challenge is enforcing a judgment abroad, but UK courts have accepted jurisdiction when the casino targets UK consumers.
Only for operators. The Gambling Act 2005 makes it an offence to provide unlicensed gambling facilities to UK residents. There is no offence for the player. However, the government can block payments, which may limit your deposit methods.
For UK players, Trustly or other open-banking real-time transfers are safest, followed by PayPal if available. Both provide a transaction trail and an extra layer of protection for chargebacks. In contrast, crypto payments are irreversible, so you have no recourse.
It’s much harder. Since the casino is not compliant with GAMSTOP, they won’t check against the UK self-exclusion scheme. If you gamble after self-excluding, the casino may claim you are responsible. You can still argue that they should have checked, but the legal outcome is uncertain.
Yes. Providers like Pragmatic Play, Evolution, NetEnt, Microgaming, and Hacksaw Gaming distribute games to any operator with a valid Curaçao licence. The games are fair because the providers test them independently, but the casino still controls payment and bonuses.
That’s a typical stalling tactic. You can still provide the documents if you have them, but do not expect a quick payout. Simultaneously, file a complaint with the casino’s ADR (if they have one), your payment provider, and the Curaçao regulator. The key is to act in parallel.
No-verification casinos are not some illegal trap you should never touch. They’re just gambling sites that operate with a different imbalance of power—and a higher chance you’ll be the one on the losing side. The allure of instant play is strong, but it comes with a price: your legal safety net. If you stick to the UK-licensed market, you get the same slots, the same live dealers, and the same excitement, but with actual rules protecting you.
If you do decide to give an offshore site a spin, set a strict deposit limit, use a prepaid card, and never gamble with money you can’t afford to lose. And remember: the casino’s whole business model depends on you giving up after your first unanswered email. If you’re persistent, your chances of seeing your money again go up significantly. The best time to complain is now, and the second best time is tomorrow morning.
That’s the reality. There’s no magic bullet, no secret regulatory trick that guarantees recovery. But there’s also no excuse for handing your money to an operation that treats its customers like temporary visitors. Know your rights. Keep your screenshots. And never let a casino decide for you whether the rules apply.
