Your Input Please Source of Wealth poll

How does Source of Wealth requirements affect you?

  • I don't like the intrusiveness and play at casinos that do not require SOW

    Votes: 66 21.3%
  • I don't like the intrusiveness but still play the same at casinos that require SOW.

    Votes: 40 12.9%
  • I don't like the intrusiveness but still play at casinos that require SOW - but play less.

    Votes: 27 8.7%
  • I don't mind. I play the same.

    Votes: 29 9.4%
  • I don't mind, but I play less becasue of this.

    Votes: 5 1.6%
  • I don't mind, and I play more because of this.

    Votes: 2 0.6%
  • I've never been asked and I am in the EU/UK

    Votes: 88 28.4%
  • I've never been asked and I am outside the EU/UK

    Votes: 53 17.1%

  • Total voters
    310
Status
Not open for further replies.

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
Hi all,

I'm trying to get a general consensus about how this SOW is affecting you as a player. Are you playing less because of it? Are you playing more? :p Are you finding yourself skipping the regulated market and taking a chance with cup o' cocoa? Please let me know here - thanks!
 
Rizk Casino is an award winning Accredited Casino here at Casinomeister
I've never been asked so I don't know what to fill in there. I don't think I will like it though but if it will affect me I won't know until it happen.
Maybe the poll should be for just the UK because they are the ones suffering from it.
 
I had this a couple of times in the past and I only fulfilled it because I was waiting cash-outs. If I knew this was going to be required I'd probably look for other options first or if I was already playing and had no cash-out pending, I'd probably move on to somewhere else. Obviously if it gets to a point where there is no option, then I would think very very carefully about where I played.
 
I fully appreciate the SoW introduction and the need for it to be present in today's licenced casinos.

HOWEVER

The management teams behind it at the various casinos MUST get a better understanding of what is required and when.

Brief example.

Player A has been depositing £25, 4-5 times per week for the last 10 years and this pattern has never changed - Should IMO NEVER be asked for SoW

Player B - Similar pattern but then these deposits raise to £100 at the same frequency, Certainly a case for a SoW request.

Appreciated, extremely vague and limited examples but this 'blanket' approach is something I'm 99.99% sure that the UKGC do not require.
 
Was asked at casumo - closed my account (I've provided my income , but it was not enough for them).

Basically it is makes industry worse, it is not a question. But in most cases it is requirements from authority, which some of brands (it seems) cant really understand, and just start ask everyone.

BR,

V.
 
Last edited:
I have only been asked for it once. This was after a withdrawal request and being self employed my contract stipulates that the content WILL NOT be shared with a third party and as neither the casino or me were willing to compromise, I blew my withdrawal and closed my account - why oh why ask at the withdrawal stage and then ambush that same withdrawal to obtain income evidence, surely this should be done PRIOR to any deposit.
 
To be honest it doesn't change a thing if your going to gamble your going to gamble. Only people who need to worry are the fruadsters and peeps hiding money from partners. Might actually be a good idea for problem gamblers.
 
Sorry can't give feedback either as not been asked for it yet.

Most of my deposits are WH and Coral and been customer there god knows how long must be 15 years plus and since no change in betting style be surprised if i get a request from them.

As for abroad based casinos amount i deposit compared to withdrawals should never trigger one. If it does then i will just stop using them.
 
To be honest it doesn't change a thing if your going to gamble your going to gamble. Only people who need to worry are the fruadsters and peeps hiding money from partners. Might actually be a good idea for problem gamblers.

Rubbish, before you accuse anyone of wrongdoing get your facts straight.

I picked the first option, as I play at less casinos now, have closed accounts at places known for OTT SOW requests, and will close my account anywhere the minute I get a SOW request, unless I can see why it would be justified. Luckily the only one who has asked so far was Energy Casino.
 
Every casino can ask, even the ones that people think don't (Williamhill etc). The big bookies carry it out properly though, ie when there is actual reason to do so.
Yes they can, but not many do. As for the bookies, I think Ladbrokes fell between the cracks....

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
For me its been hobby changing, as not played online since being asked for a SOW. I will never give up that much personal information to a casino, its asking for all sorts of issues such as fraud etc, let alone the fact that a persons wealth and income is none of their business. I now only play casinos land based, and then only when I am on holiday.

I do miss some of my old fav slots, but overall its been a positive change for me as I now have a really good casino budget when I do go away, and I dont have to ever worry about being paid or other issues you get when playing online.
 
That's the main issue there imo that casinos don't use too much common sense when starting ask very sensitive information. Some big ones rely on lifetime threshold have reach some trigger, no matter have it happen in 6 years or 6 days, you get same threatening...

It's not really rocket science to make risk assessment to players, you can see deposit patterns, game patterns, deposit methods, country and area player (even quite exact address what can tell you something) is from. With these you should be able to make decision that how big risk there is for money laundering or somebody be problem gambler.

When there is loads of transaction in short period, you assign higher risk profile to player compare to some who have been playing £100 monthly with you many years and have no remarkable changes to patterns and game play. There is quite much information available what people in certain countries earn, have cost of living etc... if you just want to get it, then you can make your judgement if there is something which is alarming. Then can ask to fill your source of income with explanation and if needed, send some proof of that but these big fines which have been talked and posted here as well, are really extreme cases where most of us probably can agree that casino should have done something with such level of spending...

We want or not, these are here to stay, if your profile don't flag anything high risk but you play like average player in your country should be able (even if there are some exceptions there and there but not often) to afford, you shouldn't be teased like these lifetime thresholds and if you state that you are doctor and earn £XXXXXX annually, you can afford to loose bit more than average.

Changes to patterns, higher risk payment methods, higher risk countries (not mean to be racist but it's one factor as well) can flag your account and still imo it should be checked if there is need to ask your SOW, if you fill form on site in question where is asked your occupation and income, it should be enough if they are in line, without to ask your last two years payslips or something..... making bit research would make this process much nicer for players and would still be enough to bust ML or RG players.
 
Hi just in case ive not read the thread, but you should have sow has affected me & the main reason account was closed was due to this.
 
I've never been asked but I'm interested to know how consistently across the UK operators the SOW question is asked. From what I've heard its not applied consistently - what are the rules behind it and are they published anywhere? Or is it another one where all operators interpret the UK GC rules differently?

And is it a fraud thing or a problem gambling thing? Or both? Do they step in and tell you to spend your money more wisely if your deposits levels are 90% of the pay cheque you present?
 
Source of funds today, max limits tomorrow, gambling banned next week. It's a slippery slope and sadly, none of the big businesses in this industry seem to have the balls to stand up to the UKGC and tell them what a load of crap they're coming up with recently. I doubt they'd listen to reason anyway (the UKGC) - they have their mandate from the government, that's all that matters.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top