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

How do the SOW requirements affect you?

  • I don't like the intrusiveness and play at casinos that DO NOT require SOW.

    Votes: 56 36.6%
  • I don't like the intrusiveness but still play the same at casinos that require SOW.

    Votes: 16 10.5%
  • I don't like the intrusiveness but still play at casinos that require SOW - but play less.

    Votes: 20 13.1%
  • I don't mind. I play the same.

    Votes: 8 5.2%
  • I don't mind, and I play more now.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I've never been asked and I am in the EU/UK

    Votes: 37 24.2%
  • I've never been asked and I am outside the EU/UK

    Votes: 16 10.5%

  • Total voters
    153

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
Cheshire
Exactly. There is absolutely nothing in that customer journey flow chart that suggests hard limits should be used. Customers should be placed into low/meduim/high risk group when assessed then a decision on if a SoW is required should be made. We see time and time again, casinos doing SoW on players who are, clearly, low risk.
Therein lies the issue. When you’ve got someone as experienced as Mark getting it wrong, how can we expect anything better elsewhere.

Some casinos are using ‘thresholds’ as a hard and fast trigger to ask for these documents rather than doing a personalised assessment of player risk...as you’ve said above.

With the power Mark has at BGO you’d hope he’d read everything said in this thread and endeavour to tweak things there for his player base. If these companies can’t find a balance then there’s only one direction they’re heading in ultimately (it won’t be up).

Ultimately the the thing that really angers me is that, as we’ve seen on this forum, some casinos are targeting low risk players with these intrusive checks then denying cash outs. This is nothing other than scumbag behaviour and I’d love to see the UKGC penalise these outfits severely.
 
Last edited:

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
100% agree here. Any request for personal info is an immediate closed account from me. I have a couple of accounts that I've had for years, so I'll probably never ever try anyone else's offering from now on. In these days of ID theft they want me to send personal and sensitive info to some corporate grunt on the end of an email address who I don't know from Adam and with the added icing on the cake that many are offshore? It ain't happening....
No offshore entity should be asking for source of wealth documents. If they do ask for it, that info will probably be sold on the dark web.
 

dionysus

Good(w)ill Ambassador
CAG
MM
Joined
Apr 27, 2009
Location
the land of snow and maple syrup
I've pretty much given up, I rarely play and when I do, go to OLG, as shitty as it is
Too much information required. Barrages of 'but UKGC says' and I dont even bloody live there.
We came into some estate $ and I dont really feel like being haunted and passing over estate docs.
I have the $ otherwise I wouldnt be playing - it's mine to burn
 

Mark_BGO

Accredited Casino Representative
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Location
Gibraltar
Therein lies the issue. When you’ve got someone as experienced as Mark getting it wrong, how can we expect anything better elsewhere.

Some casinos are using ‘thresholds’ as a hard and fast trigger to ask for these documents rather than doing a personalised assessment of player risk...as you’ve said above.

With the power Mark has at BGO you’d hope he’d read everything said in this thread and endeavour to tweak things there for his player base. If these companies can’t find a balance then there’s only one direction they’re heading in ultimately (it won’t be up).

Ultimately the the thing that really angers me is that, as we’ve seen on this forum, some casinos are targeting low risk players with these intrusive checks then denying cash outs. This is nothing other than scumbag behaviour and I’d love to see the UKGC penalise these outfits severely.
I’m not sure I’m “getting it wrong”, I’ll openly admit I’m not an expert in this area which is why my first few hires at BGO were for AML and compliance, but I think it’s unfair to say “there are no financial thresholds on the flow” when there is clearly a “has the player deposited €2k” decision tree at the top of the chart!

This is what I was (perhaps badly) trying to explain. There needs to be some kind of trigger to instigate the initial check. Whether it’s €2k total deposits as this case, £10k losses, £500 or more single deposit etc, just something for the (often manual) process to start. Depending on the risk appetite of the operator, they will be different depending on where you play. Likewise the outcome of the risk score will be different.

From an AML side of things it’s a lot easier than affordability and as a number of posts have suggested in this thread, they can be mixed up. There have been issues in the past where AML and affordability have been independent of each other, while that makes things easier process-wise it can lead to problems. Eg a customer may have no risks from AML but if they are constantly in their overdraft or there is evidence of debt on the statement they send to satisfy AML, those can’t be ignored.

There’s a huge opportunity for a casino to get this right and I’m trying to make BGO that casino. We’re quite far away from that though I’ll admit and processes, policies and internal mindsets need to change. In the meantime I’ll apologise in advance for any cumbersome requests for docs!

Mark
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
Cheshire
I’m not sure I’m “getting it wrong”, I’ll openly admit I’m not an expert in this area which is why my first few hires at BGO were for AML and compliance, but I think it’s unfair to say “there are no financial thresholds on the flow” when there is clearly a “has the player deposited €2k” decision tree at the top of the chart!

This is what I was (perhaps badly) trying to explain. There needs to be some kind of trigger to instigate the initial check. Whether it’s €2k total deposits as this case, £10k losses, £500 or more single deposit etc, just something for the (often manual) process to start. Depending on the risk appetite of the operator, they will be different depending on where you play. Likewise the outcome of the risk score will be different.

From an AML side of things it’s a lot easier than affordability and as a number of posts have suggested in this thread, they can be mixed up. There have been issues in the past where AML and affordability have been independent of each other, while that makes things easier process-wise it can lead to problems. Eg a customer may have no risks from AML but if they are constantly in their overdraft or there is evidence of debt on the statement they send to satisfy AML, those can’t be ignored.

There’s a huge opportunity for a casino to get this right and I’m trying to make BGO that casino. We’re quite far away from that though I’ll admit and processes, policies and internal mindsets need to change. In the meantime I’ll apologise in advance for any cumbersome requests for docs!

Mark
Great reply Mark, I appreciate it.

I certainly see it from your perspective, the whole thing puts you between a rock and a hard place- and obviously a lot of us are going to be partisan one way or another (yourself from an operator perspective and us from a player perspective).

You're a great rep and a decent person it seems so I have no doubts that your establishment is in good hands with you.

Regards
 

johnnymcc1966

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Location
United Kingdom
My experience of BGO is that they arent that great,better than some but worse than a good few. The mentioned £10 bonus for a £10 deposit is a 65x bonus on a limited amount of slots at 100%(a not great selection,including some but not anywhere near all netent slots.)For example Jack and The Beanstalk is not included yet Gonzo's Quest and Guns N Roses are. I think this is pretty poor. I also took a break from BGO and upon returning they wanted a live photo from my video camera rather than simply a copy of my Driving Licence or Passport,what the hell is that all about? Anyway,BGO has a hell of a lot of work to do to catch some customers back from those who it has lost. Does it still have a maximum cashout too? I was gutted when I realised I wasnt getting £200 of my balance when I won about £450 a year or so ago due to this cap. I'd previously won about £1k on BGO before these types of rules were implemented.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
I’m not sure I’m “getting it wrong”, I’ll openly admit I’m not an expert in this area which is why my first few hires at BGO were for AML and compliance, but I think it’s unfair to say “there are no financial thresholds on the flow” when there is clearly a “has the player deposited €2k” decision tree at the top of the chart!
That figure is when you have to do enhanced KYC checks, at that point you should be assigning each customer into one of the three risk categories. The £2000 has nothing to do with carrying out an AML check.

From an AML side of things it’s a lot easier than affordability and as a number of posts have suggested in this thread, they can be mixed up. There have been issues in the past where AML and affordability have been independent of each other, while that makes things easier process-wise it can lead to problems. Eg a customer may have no risks from AML but if they are constantly in their overdraft or there is evidence of debt on the statement they send to satisfy AML, those can’t be ignored.
In the first set of guidance from the UKGC on the subject of AML checks, it specifically stated that the documents supplied for this check MUST NOT be used for any other purpose. I would have to refresh my memory to be sure, but I think the current guidelines have changed that slightly to 'unless you obtain customer consent prior to the request'.
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
Cheshire
That figure is when you have to do enhanced KYC checks, at that point you should be assigning each customer into one of the three risk categories. The £2000 has nothing to do with carrying out an AML check.
To be honest Colin, I think this is what is confusing a lot of operators. They're confusing assigning risk with carrying out the checks. As I've said, this will be of detriment to the casinos that do this in the long run as they'll shed players- something Brian alluded to further up. Why lose a customer to these checks when they're generally not necessary in the first place for low risk customers?

A hell of a lot of due diligence can be carried out behind the scenes by looking into the individual casino account; deposit levels, playthrough, betting styles etc. This is the role of a MLRO worth his salt...not blindly blanket requesting documents at a 'trigger'. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can blindly request documents; the role is more nuanced than that however.
 
Last edited:

souldragon

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Location
Kent,United Kingdom
I’m not sure I’m “getting it wrong”, I’ll openly admit I’m not an expert in this area which is why my first few hires at BGO were for AML and compliance, but I think it’s unfair to say “there are no financial thresholds on the flow” when there is clearly a “has the player deposited €2k” decision tree at the top of the chart!

This is what I was (perhaps badly) trying to explain. There needs to be some kind of trigger to instigate the initial check. Whether it’s €2k total deposits as this case, £10k losses, £500 or more single deposit etc, just something for the (often manual) process to start. Depending on the risk appetite of the operator, they will be different depending on where you play. Likewise the outcome of the risk score will be different.

From an AML side of things it’s a lot easier than affordability and as a number of posts have suggested in this thread, they can be mixed up. There have been issues in the past where AML and affordability have been independent of each other, while that makes things easier process-wise it can lead to problems. Eg a customer may have no risks from AML but if they are constantly in their overdraft or there is evidence of debt on the statement they send to satisfy AML, those can’t be ignored.

There’s a huge opportunity for a casino to get this right and I’m trying to make BGO that casino. We’re quite far away from that though I’ll admit and processes, policies and internal mindsets need to change. In the meantime I’ll apologise in advance for any cumbersome requests for docs!

Mark
The thing is though Mark,and we keep coming back to this,is why is it that you can play at casinos like Novibet,Unibet,Sky Vegas and NEVER get asked for SOW documents regardless of your level of deposits,losses or cashouts.If the regulations are there then every casino operating in the UK has to abide by those same regulations.If not them surely they run the risk of heavy fines from the UKGC and i don't recall any stories of the casinos i have just mentioned incurring such fines.It must boil down to the interpretation of the regulations rather than the regulations themselves.
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
Cheshire
The thing is though Mark,and we keep coming back to this,is why is it that you can play at casinos like Novibet,Unibet,Sky Vegas and NEVER get asked for SOW documents regardless of your level of deposits,losses or cashouts.If the regulations are there then every casino operating in the UK has to abide by those same regulations.If not them surely they run the risk of heavy fines from the UKGC and i don't recall any stories of the casinos i have just mentioned incurring such fines.It must boil down to the interpretation of the regulations rather than the regulations themselves.
Because those places have risk management that works. A launderer would stick out like a sore thumb to a casino and most likely so would other fraud. Those places will do SOW checks but not on low risk customers as there’d be little point (as has been touched on a bit ago). As Colin said, they will do their due diligence behind the scenes and assign you a risk level after x amount of deposits.

The UK bookie sites have been doing SOW for years, before it became such a notorious thing for the casual player.

On the other hand, some Malta based casinos just seem to be sending blanket SOW requests at arbitrary thresholds and mainly at cash out attempts. Which is poor as the MLRO should be going on a player by player basis and that’s what I’d be paying my MLRO to do.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Just to show this has always been a 'thing' well before the Maltese gang started with it, from 2014.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Look at the circumstances, clearly that would ring alarm bells and would be a high risk customer, so the law has been there for years, just the overseas casinos decided they didn't have to follow it, got caught, got fined, and now shit themselves. The UK bookies are doing things the same as they always have, following the rules, and thats why almost never do you see a 'normal' player get hit with a SoW from them.

Of course, some casinos are clearly using them to steal customer funds, like Videoslots who lie and state they won't payout if you don't supply everything they ask for, despite MrWild saying, by law, they have to.
 

Mr_Slot5

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
Cheshire
Just to show this has always been a 'thing' well before the Maltese gang started with it, from 2014.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Look at the circumstances, clearly that would ring alarm bells and would be a high risk customer, so the law has been there for years, just the overseas casinos decided they didn't have to follow it, got caught, got fined, and now shit themselves. The UK bookies are doing things the same as they always have, following the rules, and thats why almost never do you see a 'normal' player get hit with a SoW from them.

Of course, some casinos are clearly using them to steal customer funds, like Videoslots who lie and state they won't payout if you don't supply everything they ask for, despite MrWild saying, by law, they have to.
Yep and this is why the Maltese casinos will eventually lose their UK player base. People will simply go and play where they get the least hassle.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Yep and this is why the Maltese casinos will eventually lose their UK player base. People will simply go and play where they get the least hassle.
Yep, this poll shows 50% of players have stopped playing, or reduced spend because of this.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
After my titanic struggle with Cas*mo I simply close accounts now or exclude when the SoW comes around. As a self-employed person with earnings coming in from numerous different places I just cannot face the aggro of proving myself innocent each time. My desire to gamble is far outweighed by my desire to avoid this bollocks I went through once before.
 

Mouse75

Experienced Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Location
Southport
After my titanic struggle with Cas*mo I simply close accounts now or exclude when the SoW comes around. As a self-employed person with earnings coming in from numerous different places I just cannot face the aggro of proving myself innocent each time. My desire to gamble is far outweighed by my desire to avoid this bollocks I went through once before.
My approach now.

Might be less games at Sky - but distinctly less hassle.
No SOW, very quick withdrawals and OK bonuses... not too shabby really.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
After my titanic struggle with Cas*mo I simply close accounts now or exclude when the SoW comes around. As a self-employed person with earnings coming in from numerous different places I just cannot face the aggro of proving myself innocent each time. My desire to gamble is far outweighed by my desire to avoid this bollocks I went through once before.
Exactly, I do the same, don't even think about it, as soon as I get one, I reply to the email with 'please close my account'
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Exactly, I do the same, don't even think about it, as soon as I get one, I reply to the email with 'please close my account'
That should have been one of the options in the poll IMO - I suspect many people do the same. So I cannot check any box in the poll myself...
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
That should have been one of the options in the poll IMO - I suspect many people do the same. So I cannot check any box in the poll myself...
And the things they ask for make it almost impossible to comply, plus the fact you send what they ask for then days/weeks later they ask for more, it can take well over a month at some places. They almost all want certified accounts too, like HMRC accept my accounts, why the hell should I pay hundreds to get an accountant to do them just to give my money to a casino. Not a chance. They want to pay for the accountant fees, they are welcome and I'll get them done :)
 

N1 Casino

Representative for N1Partners Casino Group
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Location
Malta
Hi there.

An interesting area for discussion and, in my opinion, problematic, both for players and the entire online gambling industry as a whole. A lot of information has been provided here, let me share my thoughts. I can understand players frustration when they receive a request from an online casino to provide financial information. But I also understand operators where SoW requests are becoming more commonplace. Online casinos have to oblige to many different rules, guidelines and regulations. These rules may vary significantly depending on the operator's license where the 'stronger' the license is the stricter the verification procedures are. I cannot share the details, since a team of professionals from the casino security department is engaged in such a check. They assess the risks associated with each player and consider each such case individually according to both an AML and a Responsible Gambling perspective.

But I'm confident that SoW checks are primarily aimed at preventing crime out of gambling to provide a safe environment for players and should be carried out with all due respect to customers.🤝
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
I've pretty much given up, I rarely play and when I do, go to OLG, as shitty as it is
Too much information required. Barrages of 'but UKGC says' and I dont even bloody live there.
We came into some estate $ and I dont really feel like being haunted and passing over estate docs.
I have the $ otherwise I wouldnt be playing - it's mine to burn
But the Queen is on your money - so there. :p
twenty-dollar-2-1600x764.jpg
 
Top