Is it time FOBTs were banned?

Rather than ban them, shouldn't they be licensed for use and control only by local Health authorities?

Thus, as with other addictive substances, they could be found in pharmacies.

the main ladcrooks in my home town applied to put a partition down middle of shop therefor making it into 2 diff betting shops just so they could put another 4 fobt's in!!! it got rejected

^^^ oldest trick in the book, loads of them have got away with it, they simply list their address as 110-112 high street for that very purpose.

Drunkasalord said
No don't ban them. They relieve morons of their money. Saves them doing any damage with it.

These damn FOBT's are an addicts nightmare.  I used to love wandering down to the bookies in the 80's and 90's as there were genuine characters who knew their racing and were always good for a conversation. Nowadays bookies have no atmosphere, nobody in them except for the red faced FOBT's deadbeat addicts, the sadness is some of them are the good guys from the 80's/90's, now snared and basically fcuked-up.  God knows what damage is done to their families.

Any news on how many got smashed? They would have made more if they were 100% angry punter proof.

No they shouldn't be banned. People should be free to do what they want with their money.

If the bookies want to become a casino, they should apply for a casino licence and be propery asessed like every other organization would be.

I work in a bookies and love it when people complain about the fobt's, they are just computers that spit our random numbers, over the course of the year my shops profit on the fobt's worked out at just over 8% which isnt brilliant but not bad either. Its just most people are to dumb to understand what random means, a computer doesnt care how much money you put in, so I'll spell it out for you...If £100 goes into a machine the company keeps £8, the other £92 is paid back out. If you put in £90 and lost it all no wonder your calling for them to be banned but if you put in £10 and had £92 paid out you'd love them, its RANDOM!! If you dont like them dont use them no one puts a gun to your head forcing you to put in money you cant afford to lose...

Your sentiments are just not true Maza they are addictive like any drugs.  Addicts do not have a choice they are compelled and very difficult to cut them out when there are shops on ecery corner.  They should be licensed like casino's and it is disgrace than bookies have been able to sneak these in past an uncaring legislative authority.

DeSSieReborn • February 19, 2012 2:08 AM GMT
What has this to do with football please?

I may be off at a tangent here but.........a lot of the time the prices on matches in the shops are worse than you can get on-line......this could be because the profits from these infernal machines allows them to squeeze a few clicks on the the prices of football match's

I could be way off the mark......just a thought

so self exclude, thats what its there for so it becomes a crime to be on said bookies premises if you have a problem ban yourself, or do you just want everything banned in life that people get addicted to i know lets ban pubs because some people are alcoholics, lets ban supermarkets because some people are addicted to food, lets ban you from the forum becuase your a moron

high streets  no more  once  bookies go  .

Oh dear Maza can't you have discussion without becoming abusive?

why does the betting shop worker think they pay out at 92%

i thought roulettte was 97% and if its random would pay out at 97%


do the other games have a lower return ?

My mates a plasterer he did a big ceiling then popped in the bookies lost 900 quid,his whole weeks wages, on the fobt then had to go back and do the final trowel.Evil things.

yeah different games different amounts roulette best game for punters, slots best for bookie, comes out at about 8.21% for year i believe

How about Betfair then...it's the same model but they take 5%

MAZA
Self exclusion is the biggest load of boll oxs the gamb comm have come up with. If someone self excludes, whats to stop him going to the shop up the road, or worse still for them sitting at home playing roulette on his computer or phone doing bombs in. If some one asks to be self excluded, save yourself the paperwork, tell them to **** off out the shop, you wont serve them again and block the machine when if they come back in.
The worse thing for the addicts is the fact they can get cash on the card over the counter.
As for the machines you are correct not everyone is addicted to them, I have the machines yet still play them else where for a bit of fun, not everyone is hooked on them.

The problem is, if you ban these then people are more likely to sit at home and lose the lot.  I bet (lol) that a lot more people have a problem with online betting than they do in brick and mortar places.

I have a similar issue with poker sites.
Being a poker player I use a lot of sites and nearly all of them now have links on the poker table to open up a blackjack/roulette/slots window.
Lose a big hand and it is soooo easy to blow the rest of your money chasing.
I had to self-exclude for that very reason and automatically do so on each new poker site I join.

In short, yes they are probably nasty but banning them will make matters worse

And you can't stop the majority from doing something just because the minority have a problem or everything would get banned

As I said, the best thing short of banning them would be for bookmakers have to apply for proper casino licences where things would get properly scrutinized by a competent person.

Machines in betting shops have the same scrutiny as machines in casinos.

Why?
What difference would it make?

No-one is going to bet less just because they have a casino licence

And then you are going down the road of should pubs have casino licences, when a lot are shutting down and fruit machines are lifeblood for a lot of them

ก็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็ กิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิ ก้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้ ก็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็ กิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิ ก้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้ ก็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็็ กิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิิ ก้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้้

The blame for people getting addicted clearly lies with whoever coined the phrase "crack cocaine of gambling".
No two words will appeal more to those with an addictive nature.
If only he had called them the "ferrero Rocher of gambling"
there would have been an initial rush of fat people to have a go but they would surely have played a few minutes before getting hungry and going down the chippy. Nowhere near long enough to become addicted.

Because much fewer of the applications would be approved, therefore there would be less of them, duh.

Because much fewer of the applications would be approved, therefore there would be less of them, duh.

That is completely different to the original comment you made.

Sorry, didn't realize I was only allowed 1 comment per thread

And yes, I do think they should be banned, but as this is unlikely and in the abcence of banning, they should be properly licenced to the same degree as casinos, can't see what is contradictory about that.

the only way these machines will be taken out of shops is if betting tax is re introduced.

as for the splitting of shops in half you should know when they apply to do this as notification has to appear in the window of said shop and also on your local council licencing website.

you can then inform the gambling commission for what good they are but they do recommend to the local council that they are not in favour of this and you can also write in saying you have no problem with the company splitting the shop in two but only one part of the premises has 4 fobts the other part remains machine free.

see then if the company wants to proceed with the application if the licencing panel puts that idea forward

You can have as many as you like however when you receive a reply to one and then post a disparaging follow up making out that you said something very different first time round you do make yourself look like a tool.

Hope that helps.

Are you a complete berk, Banks?

I think you need to reread my original comment which was on the previous page, I havent contradicted myself in any way. My post of 14.47 on this one explains why.

What is this "proper licensing" you refer to?

As I have said many times, given that they appear to be here to stay, an application for FOBTs should be treated in exactly the same way as casino machines, also with big jackpots. Which, as I have also said, would self evidently lead to far fewer of them being approved due to the number permitted in a given location.

I think I've made my position pretty clear.

an application for FOBTs should be treated in exactly the same way as casino machines, also with big jackpots.

Absolute uninformed rubbish.

Casino machines have far higher jackpots than FOBTs. In fact arcades have the same jackpot limits as betting shops albeit not roulette. Are you advocating they all shut too?

Did I say they were the same?

Or was that something you imagined

"In fact arcades have the same jackpot limits as betting shops albeit not roulette. Are you advocating they all shut too?"

Could you please point to any of my posts which have advocated any establishments shutting?

You ought to be a politican, replying to points which haven't been made and answering questions which don't exist

To answer the question, yes of course any establishment which has them should be treated equally, including arcades.

Maze, 8 percent is the highest in the country by far, must nt be any roulette players at all

No poster has of yet put up a proper reason for banning the machines.That is because there isn't one.
  No player is forced to enter an LBO in order to play.
The odds of 35/1 for 36 numbers+ zero,shows exactly what the retained margin is.
People have done their tank on many other forms of gambling over the years,and will continue to do so.
I don't like the machines,and never play them,but am not asking for them to be banned,there is no reason to.
Posters don't like them,and think they are bad news,so!!!!
As for topping up from the hole in the wall,again that is the unforced choice of the player.

One proper reason for banning them would be to increase betting turnover on horse racing which in turn would increase the levy.

Not a proper reason,just something that would help racing.

One proper reason for banning them would be to increase betting turnover on horse racing which in turn would increase the levy.

It would have little to no impact unless exchanges were banned too. They are a far,far bigger negative effect on the levy than machines.

After reading this thread i have googled these wretched machines.

By law each shop is limited to having four machines at max but the bookies are trying to get the laws changed so they can have up to eight machines

Once they have achieved the eight mark they will most likely try for ten to twelve etc etc.

I know many people will blame the punters for their own downfall but life is not as simple as that surely.

Gambling in general is being pushed on people at an alarming rate in the uk,just turn on your tv and watch a sporting event and it's non stop adverts about gambling

Look around at what is available to people as recreational activities pubs and bookies.

If gambling is promoted at such a frenzied level as it is today then don't be suprised or angered when people fall victim to evils of it!

Poverty,crime,violence etc etc will be the knock on effect so they should be scrapped.

The FOBTs are of no value to society and are helping to destroy this country every day

Again,a load of nonsense with no back -up, apart from personal reasons.
Do posters not believe that there has ALWAYS been a hard core of punters that regularly lost on their chosen pursuit.
I used to know plenty of guys that were skint by the end of the weekend due to gambling,it isn't something new.

My mate' wife was in the cart for £8,000 on clothes,due to store cards,credit cards etc.She wouldn't be the only one either.
Just an example of weakness.

i thought the banks were clamping down on easy credit, and rightly so


these fobts seem to allow people to do things they wouldnt normally do,
i know its their own doing, but some are easily led.

they are destroying peoples lives, if that is the society you want then fair enough

To start what proof do you have that they are destroying people's lives?
Again,why so much concern?
Was there the same concern about casino players?

i dont see much of what happens in a casino, but i doubt the turnover
of games is so rapid

why the concern.... why not show concern

what proof can i give you on an open forum .. probably none that
will convince you, if you have no concern

Unbiased the difference between fobts and say horse racing is that it seems very few people are able to treat the fobts as recreational and lose a few £s and walk away.

One proper reason for banning them would be to increase betting turnover on horse racing which in turn would increase the levy.

It would have little to no impact unless exchanges were banned too. They are a far,far bigger negative effect on the levy than machines.

You will not find a debate on FOBTs where Banks doesn't post.He denies it but he obviously has a vested interest.The cold facts are quite simple.If betting shops did not have machines, then they would have to up their game on proper betting to attract custom.If half of Ladbrokes profits are made from FOBTs then if they no longer had them they would have to increase turnover elsewhere.Then of course some of that would be on horse-racing with a significant increase in levy.If bookmakers could not increase sports turnover then their share price would fall and heads would roll.
  However, unfortunately the machines are here to stay so the arguement is all rather academic.Bookmakers will take the easy profits and horse racing will go the way of Greyhound racing.

I wouldn't go near a bookmakers personally.

They seem like a very low class of person

homefortea I post because most of what is written is complete crap. It is almost universally accepted on here that the removal of machines would return horse racing to its former glories. I really don't think that is true. Machines and exchanges arrived at pretty much the same time and I'm adamant that the latter caused way more damage to racing than the former.

It is nigh on impossible to significantly increase shop based horse turnover. Online maybe but not shops. If exchanges were to go then there could be a return to "proper" off course horse betting.

As you say machines and exchanges are here to stay so the argument is somewhat hypothetical.

And finally for the umpteenth time I don't work for a bookmaker, machine supplier or anyone else who has a vested interest in profitability of machines or bookmakers as a whole for that matter.

The bookmakers that is.lol

Why would you want to promote these machines unbiased?

"It is nigh on impossible to significantly increase shop based horse turnover"

Er, no actually it is very easy, you simply have shops accepting proper bets, and not kacking themselves because someone asks for 100 quid on a 5/1 shot, and not getting treated as if they trod in something because it is trading at 5.9 on here. HTH.

Er, no actually it is very easy, you simply have shops accepting proper bets, and not kacking themselves because someone asks for 100 quid on a 5/1 shot, and not getting treated as if they trod in something because it is trading at 5.9 on here. HTH.


Not true. If it were that simple why don't the big firms do it then? 

Are you seriously suggesting that they are wilfully turning down profit just to be a bit awkward?

Because it would introduce a bit of risk for them, why would they want to do that when they can get mugs to play the FOBTs risk free

But surely if the risk ultimately resulted in profit they would just as likely do it now as they would if there were no machines.

If a plc was seen to be refusing income streams the board would be kicked into touch immediately.

If you are suggesting that the mugs would bet on horses if machines didn't exist I really don't think that is the case. It is too slow, too involved for them. You only have to look at how much is bet on things like virual racing to see that the addicts want instant kicks.

Well if there are bets taken on low margin events which could subject to them to short or medium term losses, again, why would they take the risk when FOBTs are risk free?

And it's not even debatable the amount of money taken from proper horse racing is a fraction of what it used to be, it's there in black and white.

Surely the majority of these addicts are addicted to the money they MIGHT win as against the so called thrill of pushing a button or betting on a glorified video game. If so then they would look for alternatives if these FOTB's were banned.

But the reason why horse racing turnover is down is BF not machines.

Is it true that the Irish government wont allow them in the Republic? I read it when i googled the subject....dont know if its old info or not

Surely the majority of these addicts are addicted to the money they MIGHT win as against the so called thrill of pushing a button or betting on a glorified video game. If so then they would look for alternatives if these FOTB's were banned.


They will and they will inevitably look at things that give a quick thrill. Horse racing is too long an event to attract many of them. It takes to long to chase losses etc. Add to this the fact that bookmakers would look to get them on non levy products and you can see that no machines would make little difference to the levy.

In fact it could be argued that no machines leads to fewer shops and a possible downtun in levy as many older people won't bet online if their local shop closed.

Betfair is part of the reason, but the fact that they simple refuse to take decent size bets in favour of risk free, no levy paid cartoon racing, FOBTs etc is a much, much bigger one.

Is it true that the Irish government wont allow them in the Republic? I read it when i googled the subject....dont know if its old info or not

They don't allow any machines in betting shops not even low stake and payout ones. In fact I'm not sure where you are allowed them over there. I'm sure someone living there will be able to tell you.

Betfair is part of the reason, but the fact that they simple refuse to take decent size bets in favour of risk free, no levy paid cartoon racing, FOBTs etc is a much, much bigger one.

That doesn't make sense unless you are suggesting that potential large staking horse punters who are refused bets are spending the same money on FOBTs instead which is of course not the case.

They are 2 completely separate pools of money. Why would they refuse some of it (eg large staking horse bets)now if it is profitable? And on the flip side if it is unprofitable why would they accept it if machines went?

It is completely illogical and confused thinking.

No, I'm not suggesting that the two groups are the same for one minute, you really do need to try reading what people actually write, rather than want you want to see.

I repeat, yet again, taking bets on horse racing at small margins could subject them to short and medium term loss. Cartoon racing and FOBTS doesn't.

Can you honestly not grap this simple point?

The reason that horse racing turnover is down , is due entirely to greed . Shops made good money when I started working in the 1970's . It was easy , fill up the hod and grab your percentage . So easy infact , that you had to open another and another until areas were saturated . Next they began to increase the number of meetings , then the number of races at meetings , then the hours the shops opened (which destroyed evening greyhounds), then numbers games , then cartoon racing and then fobts . It doesn't matter what there is to bet on , people only have so much money to play with . There are of course the addicted  , but these people would do their money when and wherever they could . Bookmakers have become seedy , hideous places to visit......four people playing fobts with a dozen hangers on surrounding them......what's next ?

Rosie47 I'm starting to think you are on a wind up.

For the final time the scenarios you refer to are only relevant if money is being moved from one product to another. If they are separate income streams then your rationale is flawed.

If the potential horse racing business in question was profitable they would take it regardless of whether there were machines or not. Your theory only works if the money they refuse to take is subsequently spent on other products which is clearly not the case.

Banks, give it a rest.You come out with the same old rubbish time after time.Of course many of the mugs on the FOBTs would not bet on sports but many would.If you have £100 to spend and lose it on a machine then you are skint.The one fact that you cannot comprehend is that if there were no machines (unlikely) then of course Betting Shop Owners (I would not use the term "Bookmakers") would have to up their game on sports betting.
  By the way you really are the "educated" freaky fraudy (lazarus2) of the forum.....Sometimes I wonder if he doesn't have a split personality....

God you are truly stupid.

The bookies are more than happy to have their shops filled with Chinese punters doing their brains on FOBTs or clowns on cartoon racing rather than horses or footy. Ask any betting shop manager and he will tell you exactly the same.

In case you are unaware, bookmakers are frequently issuing updates stating that profits in certain areas are down due to unfavourable results at Cheltenham, or the World Cup.

I have yet to hear of any being issued due to a bad run on the FOBTs or Portman Park, maybe you could provide a link to one

Crikey eyeball..I couldn't have put it better myself !!

Rosie47..Banks has an agenda..You will get more sense out of Harrys dog...

Yes well said eyeball, of course the fact that these alternative incomes have no levy to pay and no risk is according to Banks irrelevant.

Yes, I can see why Banks is accused of being a bookie stooge or apologist, he obviously has some connection to them.

Yes, I can see why Banks is accused of being a bookie stooge or apologist, he obviously has some connection to them.

Yet another deluded fool who is too ill educated to be able to understand and digest a reasoned argument. Much easier to claim I have an agenda (I don't) rather than give a reasoned response.

It is much like arguing with a child.

Well Banks, are you able to provide this trading update that I referred to in my post of 19.50?

How on earth is that relevant? 

Read my post of 19.31 and you will see that your comment is ridiculous.

I'll just have to accept you are too stupid to understand a single thing I say and leave it at that, can't say I didn't try.

i dont see why anyone would defend them if they were not making money from them

fair enough people may do their cash elsewhere, but they may equally go and spend it in the local butchers or take the wife for a meal like they did when the yankee copped.

still, its a free country

It's not a matter of defending them it is about providing balance to the sometimes ridiculously naive rants that are aired on here.

There are plenty of things that could be banned as far as I am concerned however just because they are of no use to me doesn't mean they shouldn't exist.

I don't like smoking. I have never smoked, I don't profit from the sale of tobacco, in fact it inconveniences me at times but that doesn't mean I automatically think that it should be banned.

I'll just have to accept you are too stupid to understand a single thing I say and leave it at that, can't say I didn't try.

Another one who simply doesn't have the mental capacity to construct a lucid argument. No wonder the country is going to the dogs if this is the level of ability we are dealing with.

Banks, relax and take another sip of that fine Claret.You really are the sane side of Lazarus2 (freaky Fraudy).I am sure that there is NHS treatment for Multiple Personality Disorder.Pop down to your Doctor next Month when you get an appointment...

I have constucted various sensible, well reasoned arguments on this thread, you don't have any answers to them hence you predictably ignored them, as others will note.

Banks, relax and take another sip of that fine Claret.You really are the sane side of Lazarus2 (freaky Fraudy).I am sure that there is NHS treatment for Multiple Personality Disorder.Pop down to your Doctor next Month when you get an appointment...

I'm a one username entity and always will be!

All joking apart I reckon if we got all the main protagonists on here together face to face we would probably get on like a house on fire. It would be amusing trying to work out who is who. I bet plenty would be nothing like you expect.

Of course the most obvious argument against banning them is the one Mighty Whites put forward - free will.

I do think they are far more dangerous than many other forms of gambling though. The speed you can do your dough and the continuous nature of them make them far more dangerous in my eyes than fruit machines.

As well as the speed, there is the ease. Its far harder to go to a casino than to walk into a bookies.

Ban them and you will still get some punters, the ones who have always been there, who will find somewhere to do their dough. But I think there is a whole new raft of punters, greater in number as well, who are seduced and then astonished by the  sheer ease and speed at which they can put away a week or a month's wages.

marychain1 agree with that.

The jackpot slots aspect of FOBT gambling addiction can cause horrible losses and gambling debt that is irreparable. The latest video slot machines have gorgeous vivid colours, pleasant sounds, especially upon winning, and bonus rounds that are designed to entice and perhaps addict many who play.  These machines are specially designed by psychologists who assist in creating a machine that insures continued play and have the power to destroy lives.  Most people don't have casinos in their backyard; it is just too easy to make a visit to FOBT's when these are right around the corner.

Two very good posts, spot on.

Needless to say the apologist Banks will be along shortly to defend them, and make out that they are no worst than other forms of gambling.

Good to see some media coverage of the issue in todays mail on sunday

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2103218/When-bookies
-common-post-offices-Britain-major-problem-High-Street-campaigner-Rowenna-Davis.html

I think FOBT's in Ireland are unlikely to be legalised. The bookies seem happy enough for concessions for extended opening hours instead of FOBT's.

There are no FOBT's here in Ireland yet it's harder then previous years to get bets on. That's not FOBT's fault bookies are playing to tighter margins with most chain shops offering BOG on singles to try and generate business but the interest in horse racing isn't there any more and there are less and less mug punters betting good money. Betfair is an incredible tool for Bookies and has done as much as anything in reducing the amount bookies will take off certain people.

Banks may well be connected to the trade but he speaks with more coherence and sense then most here. The chance of FOBT's been restricted or banned is slim.

taken from your link swardean....
"experts describe these as the ‘crack cocaine of gambling’.

They offer games such as bingo and roulette to customers who don’t need to talk to a soul to play."

Absolute blather from someone with a political motive that sees an easy dog to kick....bookmakers.

I have no agenda but surely this crusade would be similar to banning cars because some people drive too fast and kill,cripple and maim others.
Not to mention all the people that die in wars over oil.

Like the Chewbacca defense, it works because it does not make sense.

Never met a rich gambler yet.lol

Not one who goes in bookmakers anyway.

Anyone promoting gambling has an agenda.

The only people who make out of gambling year in year out are bookies,some horse owners,jockeys,trainers and at the bottom of the food chain scalpers who scalp small bits off the betfair markets pre race start.

brngtwt said....

I have no agenda but surely this crusade would be similar to banning cars because some people drive too fast and kill,cripple and maim others.  Not to mention all the people that die in wars over oil....

Err no, cars serve a purpose they get people from A to B, as for instance when I needed to get my wide to hospital for our first child.

Completely agree with banning wars over oil though.

There is a huge difference between putting forward a reason for not banning machines,and promoting them.I also was accused of promoting them,when I was merely taking the stance that there was not a positive reason for banning them,apart from forumites views,which,in most cases,are based on preference rather than hard facts.
Habits have changed greatly over the last few years,unfortunately none for the benefit of racing.That doesn't in any way make them wrong.
I know plenty of punters who only go into their LBO for a football coupon(growth market) and wouldn't dream of having a bet on racing.There are thousands like that up and down the country.Same applies to the machines.
Players have their chosen thing for gambling,and that has to be accepted.

The last time i was in scotland i was shocked at some people who i had known as recreational gamblers from a few years ago had became addicted to the fobts.

Exactly fife  As I mentioned a couple of days ago in this thread,  several of the regulars I remember from the mid 90's until I stopped going to my bookies in the early 00's are now addicted to these damn FOBT's.  These guys used to be sensible horse racing punters who used to enjoy the banter and the occasional decent pay off.

I pop in infrequently nowadays but a few of them are always bashing the FOBT's.  I can't believe how fast they are shovelling notes in.  I say won guy win over £400 and when I congratulated him on his win he told me he had barely got his money back!  When they get a lucid moment they always agree they need to stop, but the next time I visit, there they are again....

Know an old bloke who was always a real Horse Racing punter - must be in his late 60's and is retired. When I worked in the Shops he always had a chat and was on about form etc... and would tell me about where he had been - think he had been something like 92 of nations racecourses. Anyway at some point last year he started playing them things and he would come in and do his conkers - oblivious to the racing etc... A lad started mentioning that he was owed 50 sheets by this old chap and I noticed he (OLD CHAP)was only now coming in now early morning and at around 2115 when he knew this lad would not be in. Last week I was in Koral and he came over chatting to me and I knew where this was going - he asked me for a ten spot, I refused - bloke looks down and out now and others have said the same.

Shockingly he brought some ladders to Koral the other day and flogged them to this bloke for 8 quid and he also had this padlock he was after selling.

It sounds funny but it is really quite sad. Not sure what the answer is as them things ain't going to go - only answer is never go on them I guess as they are addictive as hell!

MUST OF SAID 52 NOT 92!

True all over the country I guess.  In my local there is an older guy  everybody calls jock for obvious reasons.  He is one of the guys who was always worth a chat as he knows his horse racing inside out.  On the occasions I go in he is always standing there playing roulette muttering away to himself completely oblivious to what's going on around him. I've known the bookie for years I said to him that he should be ashamed that some of his old punters were doing there money like that and he shrugged and said "what can I do about it? They will just go somewhere else if I upset them."

Know of another lad who checked himself in at Hospital 2 weeks ago as he was doing so much he thought he was going to lose his home and family etc...

Odd to know what to do with them but it seems that just one free bet on them really can lead to people becoming totally wired to them and losing far more than simply their money.

I guess a good idea would be for Councils/Government to look at the way they have ****ed up people by actually meeting some of them.