UKGC wants affordability & Source of Funds check on signup!

[Mr Wild]

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

"
The Gambling Commission could require all operators to introduce a “customer due diligence” phase before letting new customers gamble, the regulator announced today.

The process would mean operators needed to verify their players through a series of checks on areas such as affordability and source of funds.

The UK regulator said the new measures were needed as “many failings arise because operators do not know enough about their customers at an early enough stage of their relationship”.
"

 

[goatwack]

It makes the most sense to do it beforehand anyway. Only questions remains is their criteria for eligibility. So unemployed people, low- income, self- employed etc will now be sweating profusely at their judgement

 

[Mr Wild]

Well, I think its quite harsh to ask everyone. A solution could be that anyone gambles for more than X amount would be required to supply source of wealth information.

 

[shadow123]

here we go again, overkill coming ...
If the UKGC were that worried about player protection,bookie roulette would be £2 not the proposed £30.Bloody
hipocrytes

 

[mcgameboy]

It makes the most sense to do it beforehand anyway. Only questions remains is their criteria for eligibility. So unemployed people, low- income, self- employed etc will now be sweating profusely at their judgement

Is that your way of indirectly asking our friend Jono if his shirt has somewhat darkened in colour since he started reading this thread?

 

[goatwack]

Is that your way of indirectly asking our friend Jono if his shirt has somewhat darkened in colour since he started reading this thread?

Leave Jono alone. He can't be as precariat as I once was

 

[aceking123]

i think its a good idea & cut out a lot of bullshit from casinos & the key withdrawals , but it should be done under a threshold of £1000 in any calendar month if you pass this then you should supply the info , that would keep low rollers out of this although again this depends on what people would call a low roller )

 

[colinsunderland]

Well, I think its quite harsh to ask everyone. A solution could be that anyone gambles for more than X amount would be required to supply source of wealth information.

Is your first post your opinion or have you read the report yourself, do you have a link to it please? Reason I ask is that I have found quotes like this about it elsewhere

“This would require players to be verified before they were allowed to gamble. We will also consult on requirements that would mean operators had to set limits on players’ spending which could only be increased once they had further verified information about the player, for example via an affordability check.”

Which is completely different to what the OP says.

Huge difference between have to do CDD before being allowed to gamble, and doing it at a point when spend goes over a limit.

 

[Jono777]

Is that your way of indirectly asking our friend Jono if his shirt has somewhat darkened in colour since he started reading this thread?

Status needs updating lol.

Pharmaceutical Despatch Administrator these days

PS: I'm actually proud of myself for pretty much staying in control for all these years, what with my £25 deposits and max bet of erm 0.40p, Could have sold the contents of my house, including the wife and Hi rolled but no, good boy me

 

[Jono777]

Press wrong button

 

[Chipkin9]

Status needs updating lol.

Pharmaceutical Despatch Administrator these days

PS: I'm actually proud of myself for pretty much staying in control for all these years, what with my £25 deposits and max bet of erm 0.40p, Could have sold the contents of my house, including the wife and Hi rolled but no, good boy me

That's the classiest way I've heard someone describe themselves as a drug dealer...I'll have 2 Ounces of your finest coke please

Just kidding btw, also I don't take drugs

 

[Jono777]

That's the classiest way I've heard someone describe themselves as a drug dealer...I'll have 2 Ounces of your finest coke please

Just kidding btw, also I don't take drugs

Whoops, providing a joke when I didn't even mean to, must be good

That's really what my job is "Drug Dealer", the locals call me 'DD' lol

Work 2 split shifts, Mon-Fri - Daytime paper work and travelling to about 15 various Dr's surgeries and evening taking the actual meds to elderly / infirm - No boss on my back, not stuck in an office all day, can pull over for ciggie if I want, CD's blasting, cracking little job lol

 

[Chipkin9]

Whoops, providing a joke when I didn't even mean to, must be good

That's really what my job is "Drug Dealer", the locals call me 'DD' lol

Work 2 split shifts, Mon-Fri - Daytime paper work and travelling to about 15 various Dr's surgeries and evening taking the actual meds to elderly / infirm - No boss on my back, not stuck in an office all day, can pull over for ciggie if I want, CD's blasting, cracking little job lol

Fair play...sounds great tbh.

Now if there was a night time job out there somewhere where you worked alone with zero interaction with other people; I'd be set. Otherwise I'm held back with severe Social Anxiety Disorder. Really would love to work instead of looking at the same 4 horrible walls all the time

 

[Valhalla]

Personally I think this is a load of shit. Let people gamble what they want, the human race doesn't need it's hand held through every single facet of life for God's sake.

 

[KasinoKing]

The Gambling Commission could require all operators to introduce a “customer due diligence” phase before letting new customers gamble, the regulator announced today.

The process would mean operators needed to verify their players through a series of checks on areas such as affordability and source of funds.

The UK regulator said the new measures were needed as “many failings arise because operators do not know enough about their customers at an early enough stage of their relationship”."

... so next time I go to the Meister Meet and wander along to one of the casinos in Leicester Square, I won't get through the door unless I can prove where the wadge of £20 notes in my pocket came from...

Why should online be any different to a high-street casino?
"Political Correctness" takes another step toward full insanity...

KK

 

[Jd666]

... so next time I go to the Meister Meet and wander along to one of the casinos in Leicester Square, I won't get through the door unless I can prove where the wadge of £20 notes in my pocket came from...

Why should online be any different to a high-street casino?
"Political Correctness" takes another step toward full insanity...

KK

I can imagine poor little Bobby getting the third degree when he wants to change a quid into 2p's to play the pushers in Coral Island

 

[SpinUk]

... so next time I go to the Meister Meet and wander along to one of the casinos in Leicester Square, I won't get through the door unless I can prove where the wadge of £20 notes in my pocket came from...

Why should online be any different to a high-street casino?
"Political Correctness" takes another step toward full insanity...

KK

Customs and Excise getting other people to do their dirty work....

 

[pinnit2014]

Same, except instead of a wadge of 20s they’ll be asking where I got ‘that’ lonely tenner

 

[vinylweatherman]

This might be an overreaction due to the continual shortcuts that leave players fighting to get their withdrawals due to something that was no problem when they were depositing away and losing. The new rules are STILL being sprung on players when they have made a withdrawal, and it invariably means they can't get their money until they have scanned and sent documents, obtained proofs of source, such as having to ask for bills and letters to be especially provided as the usual statements won't suffice.
The main thing this will achieve, overreaction it may be, is that no player should ever have to worry about further delays due to additional checks being sprung upon withdrawal.

The industry will hate it as it will also enforce a cooling off period between creating the account on the spur of a tempting advertisement or too good to be true spam email and being able to deposit and gamble away the money. It should at least persuade operators to have a 24/7/365 operation, rather than telling players waiting on a withdrawal that "It will be looked at first thing Monday morning". I bet they won't relish players wanting to deposit Friday night having to wait till Monday morning, even though they don't see any problems with players who withdraw Friday night having to wait 2 days before someone even decides whether and what verification checks need to be made before releasing it.

 

[slotter999]

This might be an overreaction due to the continual shortcuts that leave players fighting to get their withdrawals due to something that was no problem when they were depositing away and losing. The new rules are STILL being sprung on players when they have made a withdrawal, and it invariably means they can't get their money until they have scanned and sent documents, obtained proofs of source, such as having to ask for bills and letters to be especially provided as the usual statements won't suffice.
The main thing this will achieve, overreaction it may be, is that no player should ever have to worry about further delays due to additional checks being sprung upon withdrawal.

The industry will hate it as it will also enforce a cooling off period between creating the account on the spur of a tempting advertisement or too good to be true spam email and being able to deposit and gamble away the money. It should at least persuade operators to have a 24/7/365 operation, rather than telling players waiting on a withdrawal that "It will be looked at first thing Monday morning". I bet they won't relish players wanting to deposit Friday night having to wait till Monday morning, even though they don't see any problems with players who withdraw Friday night having to wait 2 days before someone even decides whether and what verification checks need to be made before releasing it.

What do you think about the idea that credit checks could be used to meet this potential requirement? It seems like a fairly obvious solution to me albeit one which is unlikely to be well received by players.

 

[dionysus]

What do you think about the idea that credit checks could be used to meet this potential requirement? It seems like a fairly obvious solution to me albeit one which is unlikely to be well received by players.

Well I could have lots of income but poor credit, or stellar credit and no money

 

[slotter999]

Well I could have lots of income but poor credit, or stellar credit and no money

Yes true....and to be honest it's not something I've thought through in great detail. What would a practical example of both of those above look like? I think lots of income and poor credit is the trickier of the two. If you have great credit then it suggests you are good for it.

 

[dionysus]

Yes true....and to be honest it's not something I've thought through in great detail. What would a practical example of both of those above look like? I think lots of income and poor credit is the trickier of the two. If you have great credit then it suggests you are good for it.

I have decent income but I dont own CCs nor a home owner - and in the past for assorted reasons utilities have rarely been in my name, so my credit isnt fantastic

My mother on the other hand has absolutely fantastic credit - but is a senior on a limited income.

 

[goatwack]

Don't see why people would object to pre- gambling 'vetting' but be fine with SoW checks.

I hate it just as much as the next man, but it's becoming quite apparent that money laundering and responsible gambling is viewed as the same anyway. If they're going to do these checks, may as well do them beforehand. Could have easily been ensnared in this vice years ago when unable to afford it, might actually do someone some good

 

[dunover]

... so next time I go to the Meister Meet and wander along to one of the casinos in Leicester Square, I won't get through the door unless I can prove where the wadge of £20 notes in my pocket came from...

Why should online be any different to a high-street casino?
"Political Correctness" takes another step toward full insanity...

KK

Funny this was never apparent to us when it was your round.....

 

[dunover]

So how do I prove I'm a pov? Send photo of myself outside BA office? Grow a stubble and buy a bottle of White Lightning? Film myself rolling a fag from kerbside Virginia?

 

[slotter999]

I have decent income but I dont own CCs nor a home owner - and in the past for assorted reasons utilities have rarely been in my name, so my credit isnt fantastic

My mother on the other hand has absolutely fantastic credit - but is a senior on a limited income.

Hmmm. Yeah I can see how credit checking might be flawed. I wonder in your example who would come out as having more affordable income to splash? If your mother owns a house I'm guessing she'd be quite some way ahead of you in terms of what is deemed affordable.

One the flaws with this new legislation is the regulator is not prescriptive about what is acceptable when it comes to affordability so it'll be left to the casinos to decide with predictable results :-(

 

[dunover]

So say a Postman walks into a bookies (public knowledge that they get about 25k if full-time, say 400 a week take-home) and proceeds to feed 25x£20 notes into the FOBT, clearly in excess of a week's wages, who is going to turn the machine off and label him a 'problem gambler betting more than his means'? What bollocks. The UKGC should spend less time politicking to crap printed in the ass-rag Graudina newspaper and start sorting out White Labels, reverse withdrawals and the autoplay bullshit they introduced for no practical reason.

 

[snorky510238]

The bottom line is you are either in control of your gambling or your not.limiting or excluding players won't solve anything they will just move around and get their fix somehow.Its like telling an alcoholic they can only have/afford 2 pints it won't change a thing.

 

[shadow123]

Why cant the UKGC just do the one thing that would protect the player the most,
BAN BLOODY REVERSALS, no one wants the option apart from the casinos.
something like " all casino shall process withdrawals in the shortest practical timescale and remove any facility to reverse withdrawals"
simples

 

[goatwack]

I don't see what else players need when we have autospins limited to 100. Nothing else protects players quite like it

 

[shadow123]

What do you think about the idea that credit checks could be used to meet this potential requirement? It seems like a fairly obvious solution to me albeit one which is unlikely to be well received by players.

Videoslots credit checked me when I opened my account, didnt know until I read a recent credit report.

 

[Lincolnuk]

Videoslots credit checked me when I opened my account, didnt know until I read a recent credit report.

It be a softprint. Not a credit check its used a lot to just verify the electoral. Been using the same system at Caddells 1 million sites for years

 

[mcgameboy]

Status needs updating lol.

Pharmaceutical Despatch Administrator these days

PS: I'm actually proud of myself for pretty much staying in control for all these years, what with my £25 deposits and max bet of erm 0.40p, Could have sold the contents of my house, including the wife and Hi rolled but no, good boy me

And so you should mate. Take it from someone who wishes he had even a mere tenth of your discipline when it comes to "making do" and cashing out, instead of letting the greed take over.

Although it has to be said, you being a seriously spawny twat helps you out bigtime.

 

[vinylweatherman]

What do you think about the idea that credit checks could be used to meet this potential requirement? It seems like a fairly obvious solution to me albeit one which is unlikely to be well received by players.

Casinos already use credit checks in ID verification mode, which is not supposed to leave a footprint. The problem with casinos using credit checks to assess players means is that this WILL leave a footprint, and will appear to other companies that the player is seeking multiple lines of credit, rather than simply having their means to gamble assessed.

It's bad enough that "shopping around" for the best deal on a loan can sometimes leave footprints on a credit file, even though the reason is that until there is a credit check, the provider won't actually say what interest rate YOU will pay if accepted. Guidance is that they should do a "soft search", but it has been known to be ignored.

It may be a good way to do it IF the government introduces a new type of credit check that gambling firms can use that won't affect the other financial activities of the player, such as getting a mortgage. This should not be a problem given that the purpose of affordability checks is to ensure that players cannot gamble more than they can afford, which is what worries credit providers when they discover that an applicant gambles.

 

[Jono777]

If credit checks become mandatory then its been great knowing you all.

Yeah I'm all good now, no large debts, no outstanding CC's or bank loans, bills pretty much up to date etc.

Credit history from years ago however when I was single and refused to grow up ain't great, late payments and part settlements etc which I believe stay on your personal file for all to see

I can understand the need for these rules but the way certain things are being implemented leaves a lot to be desired, the enjoyment is fading as it is with new slots, tighter casinos due to competition growth etc and now this on top, where does it all end and it become an enjoyable past time again???????

 

[slotter999]

If credit checks become mandatory then its been great knowing you all.

Yeah I'm all good now, no large debts, no outstanding CC's or bank loans, bills pretty much up to date etc.

Credit history from years ago however when I was single and refused to grow up ain't great, late payments and part settlements etc which I believe stay on your personal file for all to see

I can understand the need for these rules but the way certain things are being implemented leaves a lot to be desired, the enjoyment is fading as it is with new slots, tighter casinos due to competition growth etc and now this on top, where does it all end and it become an enjoyable past time again???????

It's just a bad idea I was mulling over. Nobody in authority (or sensible) is suggesting it.

And yes while you are free to have your fun and enjoyment remember these rules are being implemented to a.) Prevent criminal activity and b.) Help identify problem gambling and swifter intervention

 

[goatwack]

Yep the fun's being sucked right out of gambling, that much is certain

I liked it the way it was, merely 5-6 years ago before the 'slow decline'. Now we have this Orwellian meddling that's making gambling seem like hard work

I do believe some good can come out of filtering who can actually afford to gamble, but of course at 18+ that ought to be the individual's choice.....

The whole point of gambling I thought was to be impulsive, take a risk, seek a thrill, be spontaneous etc.

 

[dionysus]

The whole point of gambling I thought was to be impulsive, take a risk, seek a thrill, be spontaneous etc.

Lol, yup - we tell players gambling is a poor way to make money - it's for entertainment purposes, not a career choice...
..and yet, thats exactly what it feels like now - a job, not fun

 

[colinsunderland]

Credit history from years ago however when I was single and refused to grow up ain't great, late payments and part settlements etc which I believe stay on your personal file for all to see

After 6 years they should be removed

 

[bebo67]

It makes the most sense to do it beforehand anyway. Only questions remains is their criteria for eligibility. So unemployed people, low- income, self- employed etc will now be sweating profusely at their judgement

I guess " professional gambler" wouldn't fly?

 

[bebo67]

i think its a good idea & cut out a lot of bullshit from casinos & the key withdrawals , but it should be done under a threshold of £1000 in any calendar month if you pass this then you should supply the info , that would keep low rollers out of this although again this depends on what people would call a low roller )

I agree on a threshold, otherwise casinos are going to have to hire people to work 24/7 just to make sure people qualify.

 

[bebo67]

What do you think about the idea that credit checks could be used to meet this potential requirement? It seems like a fairly obvious solution to me albeit one which is unlikely to be well received by players.

Credit checks ruin your credit score. I worked in credit years ago ( 10 ish) So if you have a lot of casinos you play at then your score will suffer. Also it shows on your report who checks. If you want to apply for credit some where, even an apartment. It will show that the casinos have checked.