You may recall that in a couple of now closed threads relating to the Hi/lo reel deals finsoft/spiloG2 BetFred and others scandal that ended up with petitions and threats from the GRA boss Mr Brear I kept mentioning that Finsoft were still not UKGC compliant because their website did not follow the licence requirement to list on their website their licence number, link to the Gambling Commission and show which of their products comply with the UKGC technical standards.
Following a dialogue with the UKGC I can let you know that very early in the tale of woe Finsoft were asked by the UKGC to amend their website. They did so promptly on their website www.spieloG2.com but they failed to amend the finsoft pages on their GTechG2 website. The UKGC has now notified them about these legacy pages and they have been taken down.
The UKGC is reviewing the requirements for software firms as part of their review prior to the implementation of the new Bill which will require all UK facing sites to have a UK licence. This seems to be a messy area as two (or more) licences might mean two or more technical standards, the UK technical standards do not currently apply to many bits of software at all as sites licenced overseas use that jurisdictions technical standards and so the UK standards are not required.
Anyway in the absence of any news from those who had a game that misled about the likelihood of winning for nine years and the absence of any action to compensate affected players at least this minor loose end has been tidied up.
Following a dialogue with the UKGC I can let you know that very early in the tale of woe Finsoft were asked by the UKGC to amend their website. They did so promptly on their website www.spieloG2.com but they failed to amend the finsoft pages on their GTechG2 website. The UKGC has now notified them about these legacy pages and they have been taken down.
The UKGC is reviewing the requirements for software firms as part of their review prior to the implementation of the new Bill which will require all UK facing sites to have a UK licence. This seems to be a messy area as two (or more) licences might mean two or more technical standards, the UK technical standards do not currently apply to many bits of software at all as sites licenced overseas use that jurisdictions technical standards and so the UK standards are not required.
Anyway in the absence of any news from those who had a game that misled about the likelihood of winning for nine years and the absence of any action to compensate affected players at least this minor loose end has been tidied up.
