Gambling Review White Paper update

[Michael5482]

Does anyone know what the actual consequnces are if you fail one of these checks?

Will you banned from a perfectly legal past time or restricted and told by the Goverment how much of your own money your allowed to spend or will the draconian legisltion be met with draconian punishment and your took to your local market square and flogged as a deterent to others who are thinking of spending their own money how they wish?

If you fail the initial automatic 'seamless' check then the Operator will be obliged to conduct a manual review or close/strictly limit the account. This is where bank statements and payslips etc will probably come back into play. I don't know how they plan to handle accounts where such proof is refused or not sufficient, but currently Betfair seem to be limiting accounts to £100 per month until proof is satisfied.

There was talk of a 'single customer view' approach that would force all operators to act as one, but it feels like this is taking a back seat for now.

Cheers James I suppose this is what the independent regulator which was promised would oversee but we've not heard anything further about that either. Nothing frictionless about it then come the end of the day.

Government are full of shit.

[jamesedwards]

Does anyone know what the actual consequnces are if you fail one of these checks?

Will you banned from a perfectly legal past time or restricted and told by the Goverment how much of your own money your allowed to spend or will the draconian legisltion be met with draconian punishment and your took to your local market square and flogged as a deterent to others who are thinking of spending their own money how they wish?

If you fail the initial automatic 'seamless' check then the Operator will be obliged to conduct a manual review or close/strictly limit the account. This is where bank statements and payslips etc will probably come back into play. I don't know how they plan to handle accounts where such proof is refused or not sufficient, but currently Betfair seem to be limiting accounts to £100 per month until proof is satisfied.

There was talk of a 'single customer view' approach that would force all operators to act as one, but it feels like this is taking a back seat for now.

Cheers James I suppose this is what the independent regulator which was promised would oversee but we've not heard anything further about that either. Nothing frictionless about it then come the end of the day.

Government are full of shit.

My expectation is that as long as your credit file doesn't flag you as financially vulnerable then it will be frictionless until you hit the second threshold (loss of £1000 in 24 hours or £2000 in 90 days). At this point the operator will need to justify that the losses are affordable which, presumably, will often include the need to provide proof of source of funds etc.

[Michael5482]

Governments response to last months debate, basically they're ploughing on with affordability checks to protect less than the 1% of people who gamble who have an issue. They could of reduced this quite easily by splitting casinos/slots etc from skilled gambling for a kick off.

https://committees.parliament.uk/public ... 6/default/

'It is not our job to tell people how to spend their money'

'The checks themselves will not block or stop anyone betting - they will just flag to operators if there are factors that the operator should consider' We all know what the operators will do, you'll be banned.

It's a load of bollocks you have to wonder what freedoms they'll be attacking next. Tosspots the lot of them.

[CloseBets]

When are the checks supposed to be implemented?

Fingers crossed it doesn't have too large an impact on available 'mug' money coming into the exchange and simply raises the bar for entry for newer traders to lessen competition for whatever money is left for us all.

So called mug money will be the first to go as they are more likely to be in serious financial trouble.

I understand you and others want to make a profit but calling them mugs doesn’t paint a very good picture of the betting world and therefore this forum now does it ?

Pretty sure everyone knows the term 'mug' money refers to bets where people haven't put any real thought into it. I'd be surprised if those 'mugs' are in any serious financial trouble and if they are then the White paper will be doing good to limit their betting. I just see it the same as Derek with people happily betting on favourite names or teams. I doubt a throwaway remark on a niche betting forum is going to have any sway on how people view the betting world or regulate it either.

[Euler]

Matt Chapman taking Stuart Andrew to task: -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw2WYkWVPM0

[arbitrage16]

When are the checks supposed to be implemented?

Fingers crossed it doesn't have too large an impact on available 'mug' money coming into the exchange and simply raises the bar for entry for newer traders to lessen competition for whatever money is left for us all.

So called mug money will be the first to go as they are more likely to be in serious financial trouble.

I understand you and others want to make a profit but calling them mugs doesn’t paint a very good picture of the betting world and therefore this forum now does it ?

Mug money is a well established colloquialism in betting and trading. The inherent irony of you not knowing that is probably because you’re mug money yourself

[sniffer66]

When are the checks supposed to be implemented?

Fingers crossed it doesn't have too large an impact on available 'mug' money coming into the exchange and simply raises the bar for entry for newer traders to lessen competition for whatever money is left for us all.

So called mug money will be the first to go as they are more likely to be in serious financial trouble.

I understand you and others want to make a profit but calling them mugs doesn’t paint a very good picture of the betting world and therefore this forum now does it ?

Mug money is a well established colloquialism in betting and trading. The inherent irony of you not knowing that is probably because you’re mug money yourself

I have to say I prefer the Poker term, "Fish"

[paspuggie48]

William Woodhams via Nick Luck via Matt Chapman via The Sun.

"affordability checks during the testing period are increasing to £5kpcm and £25kpa."

Here is the tweet https://twitter.com/WIGWOOD/status/1779850140351594505

Here is the podcast (starts around 30mins) https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/n ... 0652483845

[Euler]

Beat me to it, I did retweet it.

[paspuggie48]

Beat me to it, I did retweet it.

It was pure luck Peter

[Euler]

William Woodhams via Nick Luck via Matt Chapman via The Sun.

"affordability checks during the testing period are increasing to £5kpcm and £25kpa."

Here is the tweet https://twitter.com/WIGWOOD/status/1779850140351594505

Here is the podcast (starts around 30mins) https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/n ... 0652483845

I could make a lot of money with a despoit limit of £5k a month, so if it doesn't come in at that level. That should be more than comfortable for most traders.

[paspuggie48]

William Woodhams via Nick Luck via Matt Chapman via The Sun.

"affordability checks during the testing period are increasing to £5kpcm and £25kpa."

Here is the tweet https://twitter.com/WIGWOOD/status/1779850140351594505

Here is the podcast (starts around 30mins) https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/n ... 0652483845

I could make a lot of money with a despoit limit of £5k a month, so if it doesn't come in at that level. That should be more than comfortable for most traders.

Y, it would definitely please me...if or when I ever get to those levels of course