William Hill fined £6.2m

[Nicola]

William Hill has been fined £6.2m by regulators over money laundering and problem gambling failures.

The Gambling Commission said ten customers were allowed to deposit large sums of money linked to criminal offences.

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

Looks like more of us will be completing those source of wealth forms

 

[slot_zombie]

Couldn't happen to a nicer firm

 

[The Dude]

I heard that they were closing their Tel Aviv office.

 

[dunover]

I heard that they were closing their Tel Aviv office.

Yes, moving it back to UK.

 

[Supababe]

"An operator had made the assumption, after a chat with the customer, that he was earning as much as £365,000 a year - when in fact he was on a salary of £30,000, the commission said."

Is it any wonder that casinos want such detailed info from us? If this is what happens when they 'trust' what their customers say.....

 

[Mr Wild]

"Gambling businesses have a responsibility to ensure that they keep crime out of gambling and tackle problem gambling - and as part of that they must be constantly curious about where the money they are taking is coming from."

 

[Mr Wild]

Another link:

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

"WHG did not adequately seek information about the source of their funds or establish whether they were problem gamblers."

 

[goatwack]

Constantly curious? Constantly curious? Get f*cked UKGC

Of course they just had to set an example didn't they, and of course it just happened to be one of the most popular and recognizable brands in the high st.

Good job, UKGC

 

[brianmon]

Looking at some of the figures involved, then it seems reasonable that WH were found to be negligent and fined.

• A customer was allowed to deposit £654,000 over nine months
• A customer was allowed to deposit £541,000 over 14 months
• A customer who was allowed to deposit £653,000 in an 18 month period
• A customer was identified by WHG as having an escalating gambling spend with deposit levels exceeding £100,000.
• A customer exceeded deposits of £147,000 in an 18 month period with an escalating spend and losses of £112,000.

But that doesn't mean certain casinos need to get paranoid about customers who deposit a few hundred pounds a month

 

[SpinUk]

cue the raft of AML requests today - 3 recieved already this morning

 

[Lincolnuk]

cue the raft of AML requests today - 3 recieved already this morning

I had one the other day, cant remember who it was but gave me 7 Days to forward Sow info or my account would be locked. I just replied and said for my 20 a week let it lock

 

[goatwack]

Can't wait to see this ill-conceived plan to go tits up, now that casinos are reading this case and panicking over being fined hundreds of thousands, if not millions

Now that they're trying to control our spending habits and effectively using AML & RG (with some 'terrorism' chucked in there for good measure) let's see how casinos respond long-term when 80% of their player base is depleted, and those revenue streams aren't rolling in

 

[SpinUk]

Me too. Until you provide me proper legal terms and conditions of exactly how the data’s stored, the limitations of its use and provisions to control sharing the information you can do one.

What this whole AML exercise has really brought home to me is what a bunch of amateurs most of the Casino’s are in business.

I had the impression that most of them were pretty smoothly controlled, legit operations but what I'm getting now is its basically (for the main), a few local Maltese millionaires bank-rolling their own little easy-money operations, with no real direction or thought to the long term view. I guess if you’ve had it so easy for so long its not surprising.

I think the UKGC has come to the same conclusion too and is now doing whatever it feels like with no real comeback/challenge.

 

[Mr Wild]

I have actual been in meetings with UKGC regarding similar topics. Its not fun and they expect to basically AML check any customer losing more than 1k per month.

 

[colinsunderland]

I have actual been in meetings with UKGC regarding similar topics. Its not fun and they expect to basically AML check any customer losing more than 1k per month.

So why do you do it to customers who lose MUCH less than that?

Casinos as usual (well certain ones) will go stupid over this now, wanting to do AMC's on people who deposit a tenner a month. Look at the figures ffs, if I was depositing half a million a year then I wouldn't mind getting a SOW request. I do mind if I'm depositing £500 a month.

Ironically in relation to this story, William Hill are one of a small handful of license holders who I have known to be sending out SOW requests for years!

 

[brianmon]

I have actual been in meetings with UKGC regarding similar topics. Its not fun and they expect to basically AML check any customer losing more than 1k per month.

I can possibly see why they might want to check customers losing 1k per month - From a responsible gaming point of view

But what has that got to do with AML?

And with regards to the WH 'incident'. Even though they've been fined and are no doubt tightening up their procedures.
I haven't been FORCED into declaring a loss limit with them, even though I deposit much more there than at Videoslots.
They're obviously sorting out what needs to be sorted out. NOT running around like paranoid headless chickens

 

[snorky510238]

Casinos will only do anything or change anything when they get caught out and or are forced to.If they were at all genuinely bothered about problem gamblers or where people get their money from there is a lot of things they could do at source.1 thing that I find unbelievable is the amount of money you can wager on 1 spin.I generally play 40p a spin and on a bad night can easily lose £100.On a scale someone playing £40 could lose £10,000.What percentage of the worlds population can comfortably afford to lose that kind of money legitimately?The whole structure is unethical to begin with.

 

[brianmon]

Casinos will only do anything or change anything when they get caught out and or are forced to.If they were at all genuinely bothered about problem gamblers or where people get their money from there is a lot of things they could do at source.1 thing that I find unbelievable is the amount of money you can wager on 1 spin.I generally play 40p a spin and on a bad night can easily lose £100.On a scale someone playing £40 could lose £10,000.What percentage of the worlds population can comfortably afford to lose that kind of money legitimately?The whole structure is unethical to begin with.

Or buying a feature on 'White Rabbit' at £2,000 a time

 

[snorky510238]

Or buying a feature on 'White Rabbit' at £2,000 a time

Yeah it's just laughable or I am in the wrong job.

 

[goatwack]

Casinos will only do anything or change anything when they get caught out and or are forced to.If they were at all genuinely bothered about problem gamblers or where people get their money from there is a lot of things they could do at source.1 thing that I find unbelievable is the amount of money you can wager on 1 spin.I generally play 40p a spin and on a bad night can easily lose £100.On a scale someone playing £40 could lose £10,000.What percentage of the worlds population can comfortably afford to lose that kind of money legitimately?The whole structure is unethical to begin with.

Just this morning we had this news report plastered all over Sky News, with some spokesman giving us the tale of the 30K p/a family man spending in excess of £500K every year on gambling. Such was the smugness and pomposity of this douche that I almost gagged. The guy'd most likely never even bought a scratchcard in his life, and here he is sermonizing. And yes they ARE lumping Money Laundering and Responsible Gambling together. Before long I imagine they'll confiscate winnings based on assumptions that you have a new- found gambling problem, I'm sure it will come in time....

There's always been problem gamblers, nothing new. Casinos can and have identified them in the past, nothing new. Note how no one gave a toss before the UCGC came to the rescue to save us all. Hypocrisy at its finest

 

[bebo67]

Constantly curious? Constantly curious? Get f*cked UKGC

Of course they just had to set an example didn't they, and of course it just happened to be one of the most popular and recognizable brands in the high st.

Good job, UKGC

For some reason, when I read about UKGC, I think about the pharmaceutical companies that push opioids, and then sell narcan. Or the companies that have known carcinogenics in their products, and then sell cancer treatments.

 

[TheAddict]

Edit. In reply to snorkey. Didnt thinj would see 2 new posts inbetween!

Unethical?
God no.. i remember being on 888 10-15 yrs ago for the poker, and playing the odd slot when totally new to online slots.
When loading up some games the starting spin amount was set to $125.00, which wasn't even the highest for most.
I remember mpre than one time clicking spin and half releasing the mouse button only to quickky reapply pressure when realizing how much money i was about to spin off if i had naturally let go. Slowly Moved the cursor away with my mouse, similarly to a noob who is disarming a bomb with 2 wires to cut, feeling the cold sweat drip running down the forehead as i gradually released the mouse button somewhere else other than that of the spin button, praying by doing so it wouldnt complete the spin.

Not to mention if you wanted to decrease it to the min bet available, which on pretty much most games during the time i played (not sure now, its the only casino i have ever closed my account at) you would have to do it each time the game was opened... but if you accidently decreased it beyond the min bet, it would continue to change stake and flip round to the max bet of $250 or so.
Nothing unethical about that at all either, obviously it was just set that way for player convenience so he doesnt have to fiddle with + or -

888 :machinegunner:

 

[goatwack]

For some reason, when I read about UKGC, I think about the pharmaceutical companies that push opioids, and then sell narcan. Or the companies that have known carcinogenics in their products, and then sell cancer treatments.

They ought to rename it to something more apt, more fitting. I was thinking UKAC, namely, United Kingdom Ass Clowns

 

[bebo67]

They ought to rename it to something more apt, more fitting. I was thinking UKAC, namely, United Kingdom Ass Clowns

lol

 

[bebo67]

Edit. In reply to snorkey. Didnt thinj would see 2 new posts inbetween!

Unethical?
God no.. i remember being on 888 10-15 yrs ago for the poker, and playing the odd slot when totally new to online slots.
When loading up some games the starting spin amount was set to $125.00, which wasn't even the highest for most.
I remember mpre than one time clicking spin and half releasing the mouse button only to quickky reapply pressure when realizing how much money i was about to spin off if i had naturally let go. Slowly Moved the cursor away with my mouse, similarly to a noob who is disarming a bomb with 2 wires to cut, feeling the cold sweat drip running down the forehead as i gradually released the mouse button somewhere else other than that of the spin button, praying by doing so it wouldnt complete the spin.

Not to mention if you wanted to decrease it to the min bet available, which on pretty much most games during the time i played (not sure now, its the only casino i have ever closed my account at) you would have to do it each time the game was opened... but if you accidently decreased it beyond the min bet, it would continue to change stake and flip round to the max bet of $250 or so.
Nothing unethical about that at all either, obviously it was just set that way for player convenience so he doesnt have to fiddle with + or -

888 :machinegunner:

I have only played @ 4 casinos, my entire gambling life ( 15 years) .I have never seen that before in my life. I don't think its unethical, I think its for the "elite".

 

[TheAddict]

I have only played @ 4 casinos, my entire gambling life ( 15 years) .I have never seen that before in my life. I don't think its unethical, I think its for the "elite".

I just assumed al casinos were expensive stakes, i was none the wiser at the time. I could only find an old old slot called wild spider which let me spin at 5c spins, every newer game that i can recall was (if full lines) 75c min bet. f*****s had a lot of my poker income at the time i tell ya, and not once got anything in player loyalty or even a bday gift. Never touched online since, till i found this site. And now i consider 30p being a brave high roller bet.
All those slots handed me my arse in return for a lot of wedge, but i had the last laugh cause on that wild spider 3 reel slot i was up over 50 bucks. Booyakasha!

 

[bebo67]

I just assumed al casinos were expensive stakes, i was none the wiser at the time. I could only find an old old slot called wild spider which let me spin at 5c spins, every newer game that i can recall was (if full lines) 75c min bet. f*****s had a lot of my poker income at the time i tell ya, and not once got anything in player loyalty or even a bday gift. Never touched online since, till i found this site. And now i consider 30p being a brave high roller bet.
All those slots handed me my arse in return for a lot of wedge, but i had the last laugh cause on that wild spider 3 reel slot i was up over 50 bucks. Booyakasha!

Lol. The most I have ever seen was 100 dollar bets, and i would be lying if I said I haven't used them when my account had a few thousand in it.

 

[Arch Stanton]

I have actual been in meetings with UKGC regarding similar topics. Its not fun and they expect to basically AML check any customer losing more than 1k per month.

But that doesn't seem to happen. Although if you look on your credit reports you can see AML checks from casinos and bookmakers, but quite what a credit report tells them in relation to how much money you earn is beyond me.
The main worry with this latest fine is that once again they are relating AML & RG checks but only because apparently stolen money is involved. If a casino or bookmaker is guilty of failing to spot problem gambling behaviour, why is it only a problem if stolen money is involved? If they are supposed to monitor and review every suspected problem gambling account, why no fines for where it involves customers who have lost their own money and money they had legally obtained on credit?
It's a complete double standard. Possibly because they know full well that the vast majority of serious problem gamblers do not resort to theft, they simply gamble everything they earn or borrow on credit, and that it will pop the lid on a huge problem that has existed for many years now.

 

[The Dude]

Yes, moving it back to UK.

Best move ever. Tel Aviv is fraught with rogues and scandalous behavior.

 

[Mouche12]

So losing over $1 K a month, Il'll take it that those are net losses in one calendar month?