Welcome to the Out-of-court settlement service between users and providers of online platforms under the Digital Service Act (DSA)

ADR Center is an independent body authorised under Article 21 of the Digital Services Act (DSA). It is designed to solve conflicts in a non-binding way between users residing in the European Union and online platfoms that disseminate digital content. When you file a complaint an experienced Assessor studies the facts, reviews the written positions submitted by both sides and issues a written non-binding decision.

This opinion aims to guide the parties toward a fair solution, but neither you nor the platform are legally forced to follow the decision rendered on the case and we cannot force anyone to comply with it.

We will accept disputes against all platforms that are bound under art. 21 Digital Services Act (DSA). These include for example: Facebook, Instagram, Google Play, Google Maps, YouTube, Amazon LinkedIN, Snapchat, Roblox, X (Twitter), Discord, Tinder.

If you don’t see a platform against which you plan to file a complaint, do not worry. We may accept and administer your complaint as long as it falls within the scope of DSA, i.e. it is against an online platform designed to distribute user-generated content across wider audiences.

You may challenge any measure by an online platform that directly affects your online presence or your digital content, for example:

• removal or “leave-up” of a specific post, video, photo or comment;
• suspension, disabling or downgrading of an account or page;
• restrictions on monetisation or visibility;
• refusal to act on an “illegal-content” notice.

These are exactly the areas that Article 20 and Article 17 of the DSA require a second-look mechanism for, and which Article 21 allows an independent body such as ODS to examine.

Please note that interpersonal communication services (like e mail, SMS or VoIP), storage tools (like cloud storage services) and purely contractual payment issues fall outside the concept of an online platform and filing a complaint against them is not admissible.

• Content removed or blocked – Typical scenario: a short video is taken down for alleged hate speech, but the clip merely criticises a public policy.
  Why admissible? Article 17(1)(a) DSA lists removal of user-generated content as a reviewable act once the platform’s internal appeal is exhausted.
• Account, page or channel suspended/terminated – Example: a gamer’s profile is closed for “cheating” when they only used in-game tools.
  Why admissible? Suspension directly affects the user’s access to the service (Art. 17(1)(b)).
• Monetisation or advertising disabled – Example: a creator loses ad revenue because the platform flags the clip as “medical misinformation.”
  Why admissible? Loss of advertising privileges falls under “restriction of monetary payments” (Art. 17(1)(d)).
• Refusal to act on an illegality notice – Example: you report a post that republishes your copyrighted photo and the platform declines to remove it.
  Why admissible? Article 21(1) expressly allows users to challenge inaction when they believe content is illegal.
• Marketplace trader suspended – Example: a verified seller account is frozen after failing a new identity-verification step.
  Why admissible? This is again an access restriction; the trader is a “recipient of the service”

• Outside the DSA material scope – Example: asking us to order a ride-hailing app to refund a cancellation fee.
  Reason: The app is a “very large online platform”? Maybe, but the dispute is about contractual payment rather than a content-moderation act and ODS bodies have no jurisdiction to rule on such payment matters.
• Multiple platforms named in one filing – Example: the same complaint challenges both a TikTok removal and an Instagram suspension.
  Reason: Each platform must be assessed under its own Terms; the Regulation requires a single, clearly identified contested decision. In this case, you can file in two separate complaints with us – one for each of the platform you have experienced difficulties with.
• Wrong type of service (interpersonal or cloud hosting) – Example: private e-mails blocked by an e-mail provider.
  Reason: Recital 14 DSA excludes “interpersonal communication services” from the definition of “online platform.” As emails or cloud storage services are not open to the public, they fall beyond the scope of our jurisdiction and we may not render a decision in such cases.
• Internal appeal channel not used first – Example: user files directly with us without pressing “Request review” inside the platform
  Reason: Article 20 DSA and our Rules mandates an “effective internal complaint-handling system” as the first step.
• Already decided by a court or an ODR body – Example: a national court has upheld the same removal decision and the user wants us to overturn it.
  Reason: Article 21(4)(d) DSA bars re-litigation of a matter that is “pending before a court” or “already been settled.” The same reasoning would apply in case ADR Center or another ODR body have already issued a decision, where we may not accept the case as eligible under our Rules.
• Timeout – decision older than 12 months – Example: account disabled in January 2023; no action taken until March 2025.
  Reason: Our Rules of Procedure set a one-year time-bar so fact patterns remain verifiable.
• Manifestly unfounded or vexatious applications – Example : user repeatedly reposts the same spam link just to generate disputes.
  Reason: Article 21(4)(c) DSA lets bodies refuse complaints “manifestly unfounded” or aimed at harassing the platform.

Anyone resident or established in the European Union may submit a case, whether an individual, a company, an association or a public body. Please note that you do not need to have a citizenship from any of the member states of the European Union as long as you can prove you are permanently residing in the EU.

Yes, it is perfectly possible to file a complaint on behalf of another person or entity.

It should be noted, however, that if you act on behalf of someone else, you must upload a simple letter of authorization or a power of attorney that proves it.

Click “Start а claim now” on the homepage, create a secure account and fill in the guided form.

You will be asked to:

1. identify the platform decision you are contesting (e.g., the reference number in the notice you received);
2. explain why you believe the decision is wrong and what remedy you want;
3. link of the problematic content (blocked account URL, link to the posts/videos, etc.)
4. upload any evidence (screenshots, URLs, correspondence, identity documents if relevant);

The online form can be completed in any of the following languages: English, Italian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Dutch, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak and Spanish.

1. Admissibility check – we will first verify that the complaint fits the admissibility criteria (listed below).
2. Notification – then, the platform would receive your complaint and supporting documents through a dedicated channel; it must reply within 20 days.
3. Exchange of comments – the Assessor may ask follow-up questions to either side.
4. Drafting – the Assessor analyses all material, applies the DSA and the platform’s own rules, and drafts the opinion.
5. Decision – you receive a written non-binding decision in PDF. If the platform does not respond at all, the Assessor will still decide on the basis of your evidence.

The Assessor’s decision expresses an independent view of whether the platform acted in line with the DSA and its own terms of service. It has persuasive value, but no coercive power: the platform may comply willingly, negotiate an alternative solution with you, or simply refuse to follow it.

If you need an enforceable order you would have to go to court. Our decisions cannot be enforced and ADR Center is not liable for Platforms who fail to comply with such decisions.

• Standard cases are concluded within 90 days of a complete filing.
• Complex cases may be extended once, up to 180 days; you will be told in advance if that happens.

During the procedure we may reach out to you via our Case Management System (CMS). You will receive emails on the email address you provided us with every time we try to connect via the CMS. In order to view our message, please log in the CMS.

A filing will be rejected if any of the following situations applies:

1. Outside the DSA scope – the issue is not about content removal, account suspension, monetisation limits or another platform action covered by the DSA.
2. Multiple platforms named – one complaint must concern one single platform.
3. Wrong type of service – the target service is not an “online platform” within the meaning of the DSA.
4. Internal channel not used – you have not yet completed the platform’s own complaint system required by Article 20 DSA, or that internal process is still running.
5. Already decided – the same dispute has been settled by a court, by ourselves (ADR Center) or another ODS body, or a court case on the merits is pending.
6. Timeout – the event you complain about occurred more than 12 months ago.
7. Bad-faith behaviour – for example, repeated vexatious filings or intentionally posting illegal content just to create costs for the platform.
8. Incomplete submission – the form lacks essential information or documents.
9. Conflict of interest – the complainant is a director, employee or assessor of ADR Center.

If something is missing or unclear we will usually invite you to correct the problem within a short deadline before issuing a final inadmissibility ruling.

If the platform fails to respond within 20 days, the Assessor will still issue a non-binding decision based solely on the evidence you supplied within 90 days from the date of your initial filing (or within 180 days if the case is complex).

Yes. You may withdraw at any moment before the decision is issued. For this, you can simply write us an email at ods@adrcenter.com

Notify us immediately via email at ods@adrcenter.com. The Assessor will issue a short “settled/withdrawn” decision instead of a full opinion.

Our review is 100 % document-based. The appointed Assessor compares the relevant DSA provisions, the platform’s own Terms, Community Guidelines and enforcement policies and any mandatory national or EU legislation (e.g., copyright, defamation, consumer law).

There are no meetings or calls, no oral hearings that we conduct in the course of the process. Every submission, deadline and message travels through our secure Case-Management System (CMS) of which you will be notified by email.

We would expect that you have provided us with all information that is in your possession at the time of filing the complaint. However, if after the platform has provided its response you believe that there is some information or documentation that is useful for us to consider when issuing the decision, you can send this data by email at ods@adrcenter.com.

All documents, statements and deliberations remain confidential. For transparency and statistical purposes ADR Center may publish an anonymised version of the decision, with all personal data removed.

Yes. Under Article 21(1) DSA, you may submit a complaint to an ODS body if the platform fails to respond within a reasonable time after your internal appeal. Be sure to include proof that you submitted the appeal (e.g., screenshot or automated confirmation).

Yes. You can still challenge the decision even if the content is no longer visible or the account is deactivated. What matters is the legality of the platform’s action and whether it followed its own rules and the DSA.

If you have already requested the platform to take down such a decision and they have not done so, you can still file a complaint about the platform’s refusal to remove such content, even if the author is anonymous. Platforms are required to act when illegal content is reported, regardless of the poster’s identity.

Generally, you must be directly affected by the platform’s decision. If the content concerns another person, that individual must file the complaint, unless you have legal authorization to act on their behalf.

The Assessor will base the decision on the version of the Terms and Community Guidelines that were in effect at the time the platform made its contested decision.

If you did not receive a reference number when the platform made its decision (for example, when your content was removed or your account was disabled), don’t worry. You can still submit your complaint. Just provide other evidence to help us identify the platform decision you are contesting, such as a screenshot of the message you received, an email from the platform, or a copy of your appeal.

Once a complaint deemed eligible has been decided, the case will be closed, and the decision will be communicated to both the User and the Platform.

The ADR Center does not have the authority to enforce its decisions or ensure that the Platform implements them. Filing an additional complaint with the ADR Center based on the Platform’s failure to act will not be considered eligible. However, even if the ADR Center or another ODS body issues a decision, you may still bring the matter before the competent court, whose decision will be binding and enforceable.

The only compensation we may be able to award is reimbursement for documented costs incurred while participating in the out-of-court dispute settlement procedure. This is because the procedure under Article 21 of the DSA is designed to handle requests quickly and efficiently, within a limited scope, and does not replace the role of courts as the ultimate decision-makers. Any claim for compensation related to the harm you believe you have suffered must be pursued before the appropriate court with relevant jurisdiction.