Poll Source of Wealth poll: How do the SOW requirements affect you? 2022

UK and EU only: How do the Source of Wealth (SOW) requirements affect you? 2022

  • I don't like the intrusiveness and play at casinos that are NOT licensed by the UKGC or MGA

    Votes: 28 16.8%
  • I don't like the intrusiveness but still play the same at casinos that require SOW.

    Votes: 18 10.8%
  • I don't like the intrusiveness but still play at casinos that require SOW - but play less.

    Votes: 14 8.4%
  • If I am asked for SOW, I don't comply and move on to another casino.

    Votes: 66 39.5%
  • I don't mind. I play the same.

    Votes: 13 7.8%
  • I don't mind, and I play more now.

    Votes: 1 0.6%
  • I've never been asked and I play at UKGC and/or MGA casinos

    Votes: 27 16.2%

  • Total voters
    167

trancemonkey

Ueber Meister
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Location
United Kingdom
I was recently banned from all White Hat Gaming sites and accused of playing in Bad Faith for refusing to send them bank statements... Why should a gambling company know everything about what I spend and where....

The UKGC and MGA seem to want to destroy gambling... They are arguably actively anti-gambling.
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
North West
I was recently banned from all White Hat Gaming sites and accused of playing in Bad Faith for refusing to send them bank statements... Why should a gambling company know everything about what I spend and where....

The UKGC and MGA seem to want to destroy gambling... They are arguably actively anti-gambling.
That’s the crux of the matter. People shouldn’t be strong armed into sending personal spending habits to casinos. As I’ve said before, when you step back and think about it it’s pure absurdity.

The thing that semi surprised me is that there seems to have been no collective pushback from the casino side.
 

brianmon

Ueber Meister
webby
mm4
Joined
May 22, 2013
Location
Cumbria
I have only ever signed up to, supposedly, reputable casinos.
Yet, by the number of emails and text messages I get. My name, email and phone number have, obviously, been sold on or leaked or whatever.
So, why on earth would I trust any casino with even more personal information?

The UKGC may be insisting on certain customers submitting such information.
BUT, can they (the UKGC) guarantee the safety of that information?
If not, are they going to be paying compensation if anything goes wrong?
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Really?? Are we still, at UKGC casinos, seeing this bogus deposit limit scam? Loss limits masquerading as 'deposit limits' I see they've added 'net' to it so they can still avoid using the emotive word 'loss'. :rolleyes:
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
You missed out "I find it intrusive and I don't play online anymore" ;-)

Back when I did, my main issue was not knowing who would see that info. I obviously trusted the casinos I played at as a whole but you have no idea who sees the info. I wouldn't have minded so much if it was a central organisation, perhaps Government owned, who received the docs although even then, the whole idea of being assumed to be a criminal until proven innocent rankled with me.

It wasn't the only reason I gave up gambling online around 5 years ago but it was a major factor.
That's the thing. I have stopped playing at most MGA or UKGC casinos mainly because I don't trust the way this information is handled. PLUS it's none of their damn business. In the early days of online gambling, the online casinos tried to mimic how the casinos in Las Vegas operated. It was all going relatively fine until the nanny governments got involved.

If you are not required to show one's source of wealth when visiting a land based casino, then it SHOULD NOT be done with the online counterparts.

We all want regulated gaming, but not intrusively regulated gaming. If a casino is going to go the SOW path, then it should be upfront and done when a player signs up.

Additionally, there should have been a central organisation set up for this. Not some Joe's working in some back office handling private financial docs from players. You think I or countless others with comply? Nope - that ain't going to happen. There are plenty of upstanding and trustworthy casinos licensed elsewhere that don't intrude on our privacy.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
@everyone in this thread: 40% of folks selected "If I am asked for SOW, I don't comply and move on to another casino."

If you don't comply and move on, what about your winnings? Are you just abandoning your winnings and moving on? If so, then why bother?
 

Deeplay

New World Order
webmeister
CAG
mm1
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Location
The biG Eu
UKGC have gone and pretty much buried UK gaming. This is a small poll for sure but the results so far are telling. If it had been a central govt body then maybe just maybe I would have stayed gaming in the UK (but what about auto play ..) ... but as others said in this thread - sending very personal and often sensitive information to some hole in a casino back office. High risk for sure. I could never comply even if I wanted to as all my income comes from multiple sources - with multiple clients across many regions. I am not allowed to divulge such information. So it was always a no go.

I recall how the legit casinos of yesteryear were pretty much self regulated. Sure they lacked certain RG tools but that was always gonna be an easy fix. So now no wonder the exodus has begun to offshore gaming and it will continue. Plus the likes of 3dice who have extensive RG tools - never any issues - safe as it comes - and without any intrusion looking for sow or other bullshit.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
UKGC have gone and pretty much buried UK gaming. This is a small poll for sure but the results so far are telling. If it had been a central govt body then maybe just maybe I would have stayed gaming in the UK (but what about auto play ..) ... but as others said in this thread - sending very personal and often sensitive information to some hole in a casino back office. High risk for sure. I could never comply even if I wanted to as all my income comes from multiple sources - with multiple clients across many regions. I am not allowed to divulge such information. So it was always a no go.

I recall how the legit casinos of yesteryear were pretty much self regulated. Sure they lacked certain RG tools but that was always gonna be an easy fix. So now no wonder the exodus has begun to offshore gaming and it will continue. Plus the likes of 3dice who have extensive RG tools - never any issues - safe as it comes - and without any intrusion looking for sow or other bullshit.
Excellent points, Deeplay. Reminds me of the adage (From Cowboy Ronnie of course) "The nine most terrifying words in the English Language are: I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.”

 

SCATT3R

Newbie member
Joined
Sep 19, 2022
Location
Tromsø
Voted 2) - Find it intrusive but play there all the same (grudgingly).

Back when SoW was introduced, the reasons seemed noble enough: To detect the dirty money, and to ensure problem gamblers would have a harder time getting their impulsive deposits through.
But it seems that somehow the majority of the casinos and sportsbooks have managed to turn it upside down and it is now used merely as another instrument to hold your money hostage and to stall payments.

Example, over a 3-4 months period of time I made a series of deposits to a reputable mga licensed nordic casino&sportsbook I had been using for a while, all of these deposits much bigger and of a far higher frequency than my normal behaviour. Also, every time I'd play untill my balance was back at 0. Not once was I asked what, or whose, money I was spending (the only one I'd hear from was their vip manager, quite eager to befriend me). But once I initiated a significant payout, all I could hear was SoW this and SoW that...
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
This has occurred twice for me - both times I initiated a w/d and shut the account as in both cases the SoW request had come AFTER the w/d actioning. One paid in 2 days, the other after 5 days when I told them that they were not supposed under UKGC rules to hold the w/d to ransom after the event.
 

steveyboy

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2010
Location
manchester england
ive got an issue with that lovely trustworthy casino the one and only drum roll please its CASUMO who are the worst at sows, always asking for this that and everything, after being FULLY VERIFIED after a withdrawal they asked for more. but what they wanted i could not supply so emailed them as per usual they never respond this happened at least 5 times so last email stated i will answer your email when you respond to mine and told them they are shocking at customer service. upshot is they never replied so good riddance.
 

johnnymcc1966

Meister Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Location
United Kingdom
As per Brian's request in the PMs on my account. I voted 'move on to another casino' but luckily I have never yet had a balance in any account to worry about. I would not forfeit anything if this did happen though and would begin a PAB or similar to recover it.
 

NylaHush

Newbie member
PABnonaccred
PABinit
Joined
Dec 1, 2021
Location
North York
The Source of Wealth or SOW is here to stay in the UK and EU - well at least with those casinos licensed in the UK or in Malta. These are the only two jurisdictions that are requiring players to submit personal banking information that most of us (including myself) consider intrusive and biased towards online gamblers. A land based casino will never if ever ask for your pay stubs to prove you should be gambling.

We conducted this poll in both 2019 and 2021 , and it's interesting to see the trends in how folks are reacting and dealing with this.

So please vote in our poll and give us some thoughts on why you voted this way. ANd please - this only applies to folks who live in the EU/UK. All others please don't vote.

Previous polls:
Source of Wealth poll - 2019
Source of Wealth poll: How do the SOW requirements affect you? - 2021
I’m not in the jurisdiction you had originally asked but we do, just recently, have to provide SOW here. In order To play on a licensed Ontario casino, you don’t have a choice. Either you give the info or you play on an unlicensed (in Ontario) site. Depending on the casino and how intrusive they actually get, I’ll put my occupation and stop there. There was one casino that was actually asking for my credit score/report and everything! Not a friggin chance lol, that’s going too far for me!
 

TheSchwad

Experienced Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Location
Stockton-on-Tees
I voted 'move to another casino', thankfully each time I've refused to comply it's been without a withdrawal pending (even Casumo 🤣 ), except for Pokerstars, where I had a small balance, so I told them to close my account.

I used to comply and have completed several SoW procedures successfully, though I won't provide documents these days due to the extreme nature of requests.
Goalposts get moved with each document provided (if asked for everything in one go I 'may' comply) which prolongs the process. I'm happy to provide Pay Slips and bank statements that correspond to wages, deposits/withdrawals to the said casino etc.
I refuse at the point where they want to see three months 'unredacted' statements and evidence of other assumed incomes (crazily savings accounts as though I'd gamble with these :mad:) or refuse perfectly good documents.
 

winner2021

Newbie member
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
I had a couple big wins this year (around 4k a few months back and another 5k a few weeks ago after playing years and never having a win that big) because of that I was able to wager a lot on slots and now they've put deposit/loss limits in place. If I want to raise them I have to do something like a SOW. So I have to limit my spending now cos there is no way they are invading my privacy like that. The thing is I doubt they take into account any big wins you've had, the only thing that counts is if you've got a 100k a year job. Otherwise they think you can't afford what you are spending.

And when I came across this on the gambling commission site-

  • An online operator permitting a customer to deposit, and lose, £187,000 in two days. This was despite the customer having no regular source of income and funding play from inheritance money or redeposited winnings.

My reaction was, so? Yes it's a huge amount of money, and it might not be what their dearly departed wanted them to spend their inheritance on but it's legal isn't it, it's their inheritance, their money! Now the UKGC are making out like spending winnings or inheritance is something illegal. It's not ideal but I really don't see what business it is of the gambling commission how people spend their inheritances or winnings. That is a legal source of wealth isn't it, unless I am missing something...
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
North West
I had a couple big wins this year (around 4k a few months back and another 5k a few weeks ago after playing years and never having a win that big) because of that I was able to wager a lot on slots and now they've put deposit/loss limits in place. If I want to raise them I have to do something like a SOW. So I have to limit my spending now cos there is no way they are invading my privacy like that. The thing is I doubt they take into account any big wins you've had, the only thing that counts is if you've got a 100k a year job. Otherwise they think you can't afford what you are spending.

And when I came across this on the gambling commission site-

  • An online operator permitting a customer to deposit, and lose, £187,000 in two days. This was despite the customer having no regular source of income and funding play from inheritance money or redeposited winnings.

My reaction was, so? Yes it's a huge amount of money, and it might not be what their dearly departed wanted them to spend their inheritance on but it's legal isn't it, it's their inheritance, their money! Now the UKGC are making out like spending winnings or inheritance is something illegal. It's not ideal but I really don't see what business it is of the gambling commission how people spend their inheritances or winnings. That is a legal source of wealth isn't it, unless I am missing something...
Exactly. I've made this point before. People should be free to spend THEIR money how they see fit. Anything else is just a blatant attempt to control what people can and can't spend their legitimate money on. There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with depositing from winnings...that's the bread and butter of bankroll management; surely that's better than dipping into 'fresh' funds from wages. I honestly have no idea what goes through the UKGC's minds.

I suppose it doesn't exactly help matters that these people gamble said money then go whining their bag off to the regulator when they lose it, hoping to get some sort of refund.

I remain firmly of the opinion that more time and resources need to be spent on educating gamblers on how to reach out for help and the variety of self help tools that are readily available to them, rather than the draconian cutting everyone off at source like the UKGC seem to want to do.
 
Last edited:

winner2021

Newbie member
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
@Mr_Slot5 yes I really don't see what that operator did wrong-they asked for SOW given the huge amount of money involved and they were given satisfactory evidence that the gambler in question had legal funds to play with, was not money laundering and was not getting into debt. That should be the end of it. They are pretty vague as well, like how much was the inheritance they received, how much of it was spent and how much was just wagering previous winnings? Not that it's any of our business, but they are making that person look bad even though they went to all the trouble of giving reasons why they could afford to gamble that much. It's not up to them to pass judgement on other peoples lifestyles-don't have a job but you're retired and got loads of savings, or you won the lottery, sorry no regular income, failed SOW. Who wants to offer up your personal info to fail it anyway and then end up as an example of a problem gambler on that douchebag site?
 

satchnz

Experienced Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2021
Location
Essex, UK
As a small stakes player I technically shouldn’t get caught up in SOW. But if I was to be asked, no casino will be getting my private financial information. I’d probably quit online slots altogether and go outside and play instead…

I guess for the casinos concerned it is better to turn away customers than get massive fines imposed by the UKGC. It’s a lose/lose situation for casinos so I’m not sure why they aren’t showing more resistance. Oh yes, the massive fine. What a fucked up situation…
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
On the flip side though: people, for MGA anyway, are quite happy/content to send in passports and driving licences as part of KYC. And, might be wrong, but I could do a lot more damage with that than information that I spent 3.33 in Greggs on a Thursday.
 

TheSchwad

Experienced Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2018
Location
Stockton-on-Tees
On the flip side though: people, for MGA anyway, are quite happy/content to send in passports and driving licences as part of KYC. And, might be wrong, but I could do a lot more damage with that than information that I spent 3.33 in Greggs on a Thursday.

That's something I'd forgot to add, it's very strange that I get many messages and emails each day from sites I've never even heard of, clearly at my phone number and email has been sold by at keast one site to other vendors. God knows what other info they've sold.

You're right the identity part is most valuable to buyers, but heck could I trust them not to sell details of my personal finances and aspects of spending in everyday life.

I've seen many soft credit checks on my credit it file which I'm happy with, this is probably the best way to go rather than asking to see extremely personal information, which most people will not comply with.
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
That's something I'd forgot to add, it's very strange that I get many messages and emails each day from sites I've never even heard of, clearly at my phone number and email has been sold by at keast one site to other vendors. God knows what other info they've sold.

You're right the identity part is most valuable to buyers, but heck could I trust them not to sell details of my personal finances and aspects of spending in everyday life.

I've seen many soft credit checks on my credit it file which I'm happy with, this is probably the best way to go rather than asking to see extremely personal information, which most people will not comply with.
There’s some sites, even ‘reputable’ (whatever that means) that request it via email: which is bonkers as no encryption etc so even if they don’t intentionally sell it, it’s lying in wait for someone to get their hands on quite easily if they have a data breach; and if FB, LinkedIn etc can be hacked then I think we can assume a tinpot casino can as well
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top