1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

UKGC - food for thought

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by jetset, Apr 5, 2015.

    Apr 5, 2015
  1. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    From the Sunday Independent in a report on 666Bet slowpay after one of its directors was arrested on a GBP 21 million case:

    "A spokesperson for the Gambling Commission said that gamblers use online bookmakers “at their own risk” and it was not within the regulator’s “remit to recover funds”.

    "They added: “While remote operators licensed by the [Gambling] Commission must keep customer funds in a separate account or accounts, there is no guarantee that this will ensure that customers get all their money back if the company runs into financial difficulties.”

    "A spokesperson for 666Bet could not be reached for comment, but the firm has previously denied any connection between the police investigation and the day-to-day running of the company."
     
    5 people like this.
  2. Apr 5, 2015
  3. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    Hopefully they'll eventually be able to deny any connection between Bell doing time and "the day-to-day running of the company". :D
     
  4. Apr 5, 2015
  5. jetset

    jetset Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Senior Partner, InfoPowa News Service
    Location:
    Earth
    It does, however, throw into question this regulator's efficacy in helping screwed players in a practical sense if disaster strikes.

    Perhaps they're more effective in mediating individual disputes between players and operators...but isn't that something they have farmed out to accredited third parties?
     
    1 person likes this.
  6. Apr 5, 2015
  7. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    This could drop the government right in it as it suggests that the consumer protection aspect is no better than under the previous system, which could open the way for Gibraltar to appeal the case it lost earlier on the grounds that the "consumer protection" argument offered up by the UKGC/HMRC/Government was false all along. This would then make it purely a taxation issue, which they could then pursue in the EU courts. Other companies that have tried to prevent UK customers from making their purchases from other EU states have LOST in the EU courts under "single market" rules. If we can't be prevented from going to Calais and filling a van up with fags and booze, paying French taxes, and then bringing them back for consumption here, it can be argued that the internet should be treated the same, and that if the "shop" is in Gibraltar, the bets should be taxed by Gibraltar, not the UK. If other EU countries join in with Gibraltar, there is more chance for success.

    The real problem this case brings to light is that whilst there is a rule requiring players' funds to be protected, it isn't going to be enforced.

    Maybe the government needs to make the law stronger, such as making a failure to protect players' funds a CRIMINAL offence, rather than a civil or licencing matter. Whilst this might not get players their money back, it will make it less likely that it will be lost in the first place as the directors will be facing the threat of jail, and could also have their assets seized as "proceeds of crime". This would negate the usual trickery of using company law in order to walk away from failure, which is how Purple Lounge managed to screw over it's players.
     
    1 person likes this.
  8. Apr 5, 2015
  9. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    Which pretty much translates into "farmed out to eCOGRA" since they've emerged as the ADR** of choice (several hundred casinos and counting).

    ** = Alternate Dispute Resolution, the service to which a player complaint is given when the player disputes the casino's decision(s) against them. This is not optional: the player either accepts the casino's decision OR the issue gets sent to the ADR, under normal circumstances there is no third option.
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page