There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 492 comments are related to the topic:
Latest on Affordability Checks
Latest on Affordability Checks
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 492
|
By:
I’m convince the tories are well aware what getting this wrong entails, which is why they didn’t bring it out earlier.
Had it been Starmer and his bunch of misfit emotional student economists then you could have lit a fire under the gambling sector already. |
|
By:
"But that’s at odds with the other metric of 2000 net loss over 3 months." Not really Dusty. Either applies. You just can't lose £1000 in 24 hours even if you're making 10k a month. I think £999 is going to be a popular stake.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
It is insanity but it helps get rihttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6KBg45G56Qd of winners that pay little or no PC cos they win slow. Frank should come on again to tell us whether there's a change on his limits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6KBg45G56Q
|
|
By:
Before the ACs kick in the issue of requiring the checks when withdrawing winnings needs to be addressed.
This happened to me they would not allow me to withdraw £600 until I provided them with the checks. I would want the option of being allowed to withdraw and close my account. |
|
By:
dustybin14 Jul 22 01:22Joined: 29 Dec 08 | Topic/replies: 22,452 | Blogger: dustybin's blog
But that’s at odds with the other metric of 2000 net loss over 3 months. One thing I will say is wait for the actual definition that the paper actually says first…. Due to the omission of any of your trademark, binary political rants, - this ^ is probably the most sensible thing you have ever written on this topic. Moreover - Surely nobody can imagine a world where bookmakers refuse to take bets from punters that are in lifetime profit?   |
|
By:
But it would all be rather late would it not if the worst were to materialise and peeps such as you TM said there were no fire?
As I’ve always said I’d rather all this pass with no ramifications, though that is unlikely…rather than the regulation applied to the masses in a crude way than stymies the industry for want of a few On that last point, could you imagine a bookmaking industry obsessed over America and simply brush off over regulated old world economies? Because I can and it’s not imagination; there are cases in Europe where bookies have washed their hands of the markets all the while all tending for the soon to be opened state of California. |
|
By:
It probably is (to some extent) too late dusty. The UK has been the "wild west" of gambling for 20+ years. It was never going to last forever! If you didn't make your money in the golden era (2000-2010 and to a lesser extent from 2010 onwards) and invest in something more sustainable.
I maintain that the tax rake will ensure betting doesn't die - but a rebalance/reset was long overdue and was hastened by the greed/behaviour of the on-line slot/casino operators. Ironic if the USA becomes the new "wild west" - but I can't see it (or even if it comes to pass, I can't see it lasting). They call it the land of the free - but apart from guns, they are pretty keen on prescriptive prohibitions over there. It's all still speculation - I don't understand how what is in the white paper can keep changing! - A cynic would think that the people in charge just keep leaking things to the press in order to gauge a reaction! |
|
By:
If you want to bet more prove you can. Thats it a nut shell. Betfair and exchanges in big trouble, liquidity will suffer. But the vast majority of punters wont be affected.
|
|
By:
Heres what ive been thinking lately. The £2 and £5 stakes limits introuduced on online casinos that bookmakers and betfair hoover up off everyone ( with no risk) are finished..... I guess its about time, the roullete 100-500 drunk spins that they rely on are finished too. Not a bad thing
|
|
By:
The problem with that argument Trident is that the underlying metric is as yet unknown, how much disposable is deemed ‘acceptable’ for eg…and why unilaterally?
As for ‘casino/slots etc’ the regulation didn’t target those specifically….for a reason. TM You see, you keep mentioning the fact I refer to it ideologically, when you just do the same. The whole spectrum of argument IS ideological, whether it’s here or in America. Over 60% of Flutter’s revenue already come from America, that’s pre-California. I see the arguments as life dichotomies, the ones who have problems with making informed choices tend to be the ones that dropped out the anus of society and want everyone’s wings clipped in a misplaced belief all capitalism is crony, or that opportunity doesn’t exist….I’m afraid it does, just they don’t wish to put the hard work in. |
|
By:
I have today received a very interesting email from a Gent offering Best Odds Guaranteed, No affordability checks etc etc.
I telephoned him and he basically an 'underground' Bookmaker. I have been punting over 50 years and I think this is the start of things going back to how they were before 1961. |
|
By:
Management....you are not a cynic in this instance. This is exactly how things work , " leaks " seem to be prevalent more than ever nowadays , and yes it"s often to gauge public reaction before things are finally put into stone.In most cases if you cant change anything individually speculation is a complete waste of time and energy , and we will just have to accept the outcome of whatever measures are brought in , or ofcourse quit . Lets face it the " in running " game is more or less finished anyway , although there are ofcourse still a few people left who appear to be in denial.
|
|
By:
TM, when you use the word ‘reset’ do you break into a little chuckle?
You can park that whimsy with all the other burnt out carcasses of ‘people power’ directives, like Occupy, Momentum, Arab Spring… Stakeholder capitalism and workplace democracy are just examples of brain farts of those supporting Human Resource empowerment or forcing gender identity on everyone. It’s mildly amusing because we have Co-Ops now, they arnt very competitive and attract little investment….the idea that the cleaner needs asking about how to take on the competition is hilarious, but I think it’s topped off by the disingenuous nature you attempt to use ‘reset’ (of assets) where what you really mean is ‘close down’. |
|
By:
dusty - you don't know me, or what I think or my political views - but your binary approach to EVERYTHING makes you think you know me, because you assume I too must be very one dimensional and set in my views. Believing as I do, that a few things in life need a bit of oversight or regulation doesn't make me a raving communist, a pinko or a tree hugging wokist. That couldn't be much further from the truth.
I actually agree with you (broadly) on many things, more so than you would probably imagine! But I'm still sane enough to understand that things (or at least things that work well) aren't black or white, all or nothing, far left or far right. The same with regulation - I don't want to see an unregualted/badly regulated free-for-all (that's what has got us to where we are today) and I don't want to see regulation that stiffles or strangles. It is possible to have a view that isn't extreme and fixed beyond reason. |
|
By:
I cant type sentences like above very well, never been good with grammer and wording etc, just resonable about horse racing
 One thing im very happy about is the Casino games limits. To me this makes perfect sense. Is horse racing and football betting as addictive as online slots and casino games?. I say NO its not. |
|
By:
I'm not saying people can't get into trouble with sports betting, I just think they should make a massive distinction between the two.
|
|
By:
dustybin Yes your probably right with your thoughts. I know I'm probably using assumptions like everyone else, since we haven't read through the white paper yet. Does anyone know how long it would take lawyers to sift through every page and legislation? I reckon it would take months....
|
|
By:
We need to complete verification checks before you can do certain things in connection with your Account, including withdrawing winnings from your Account. If we're unable to complete our checks to our reasonable satisfaction we will suspend or ultimately close your Account and pass on any necessary information to the relevant authorities (See clause 5).
Just received this. Change of conditions. |
|
By:
MythWA, was that an email from Betfair?
They haven't emailed me yet. I would have thought that, if you failed verification checks (whatever they are), your money should be returned to the bank account that you used to deposit the funds in the first place. |
|
By:
I withdrew 10k winnings a few months ago.
Nothing asked for |
|
By:
Take me near 2 years to deposit that now
|
|
By:
I lost 2k in a day on here a couple of weeks ago which was a major amount for me and expected some communication from Betfair. Nothing, thankfully, so it seems a bit random.
|
|
By:
Well I suspect they don't really care about those making losses. If the cretinous Govt, egged on by the do-gooders who hate gambling, are determined to push through a system which theoretically solves the problem, then the bookies will look for a way to turn that to their advantage. In practice, many problem gamblers will be allowed to carry on, while bigger successful punters will be eliminated. When it comes to who can outthink who, I seriously doubt the Govt will be the winner...
I can see the sense of putting limits on online slots and bingo games, since those are the ones that attract most of the problem gamblers. They're available to play 24 hours a day, and they require absolutely no skill to play. (Indeed, you actually can't employ any skill, and are almost guaranteed to lose long-term..) I think sports betting is a very different matter, though. I can understand limiting the number of times you can make a deposit in a month. Compulsive gamblers who have just lost a load of cash will immediately look to deposit more so that they can, erm, win it all back. Putting limits on the speed and frequency with which somebody can make additional deposits would theoretically curb much of that behaviour. However, simply plucking a single figure out of the air (and then saying that people who lose that much have to be able to prove that their salary can support such a habit) is utterly ridiclous. What about those who deposit once and then gradually build up their stakes over time? They'll be closed down as a result of this. (Which, again, I guess is a plus as far as the bookies are concerned.) |
|
By:
black market time
|
|
By:
I agree these loss limits aren't the way forward for punters.
If further restrictions are coming it should be on deposits, once cleared the funds are yours to use time and again should you win. Consequently if you build a pot up and lose the lot its fine, you shouldn't be fearing falling foul of a maximum you can lose a day. Soft credit checks will also show ccjs which keep getting mentioned, but also if you're missing payments on loans, mortgages etc I would suggest if you're keeping up with bill payments then you should be free to spend your disposable income on what you want, after all it's yours. The £125 limit is ludicrous. An office worker who buys a coffee and a sandwich every day at £5 or whatever will rack up more expenditure. Agree you can't get addicted to sandwiches. As for £500 it's laughable. I guess the idea is catch people before it gets out of hand, but you have to let them loose to see if it would get out of hand |
|
By:
This will end the way most prohibitions end...illegal bookmakers will fill the void until the State recognises that it has lost a tax source and done nothing to stem excessive abuse. the question is how long will it take for the State to realise their mistake.
|
|
By:
I asked for a monthly £2,000 deposit limit, after alot of back and forth we settled for £1500 net a month.
|
|
By:
the soft credit checks are ok imo because someone missing loan/mortgage payments etc clearly is at elevated risk of trying to gamble their way out of debt
as for the rest of it...total fkin clown world imo somebody has money in the bank they can do what they like with it nanny state bs yet another attempted power grab |
|
By:
Lots of mixed messages, couple of weeks ago the jungle drums were telling us that the result of the white paper was nowhere near what many feared, subsequently though it appears that it is what many feared
 |
|
By:
I'm with you Wonders
Soft Credit checks are really the only thing needed, they will see what credit you have what your balances are, repayment history, ccjs etc. Surely that's enough to see if anyone is susceptible to problem gambling. It doesn't need to be any more intrusive |
|
By:
Well we don't know what'll be said, of course. Some of the reports are talking about only going hard on those who rack up losses of a couple of thousand over a 90-day period. I can imagine some long-shot players would be hit by that, although from a selfish personal point of view, that wouldn't bother me too much. However, £1000 over a single 24-hour period? Almost all decent-size players are going to fall foul of that, and if you don't have a big salary then you won't ever be able to bet for more than buttons.
|
|
By:
Not sure that soft credit checks tell you about repayment history, ccjs etc. As I understand it, they just give an overview and a score. Of course, if you had ccjs etc. then you would turn up a low score as a result. At that point BF would want more information, and would ask you to consent to a hard credit check.
|
|
By:
That should only apply if they giving you credit
 |
|
By:
Apparently they will see all that information
It's not just a credit score, they can basically see pretty much what you see on your credit file apart from other soft checks. Although I'm only going on what I've read on various sites, and the fact it corresponds with the report saying they'll be looking at ccjs etc on the £125 monthly limit |
|
By:
When I say what I've read I mean on various websites that explain what the difference is between hard and soft credit searches and what they see
|
|
By:
"However, £1000 over a single 24-hour period? Almost all decent-size players are going to fall foul of that, and if you don't have a big salary then you won't ever be able to bet for more than buttons." That's right. I can't see how it's OK to lose over £1000 on course in one day but here it is not and 24 hrs could even stop you betting the next afternoon.
|
|
By:
I've been struck by this yesterday and had to laugh
.Will try not to give a life story. Account down pre 2022, steady, a couple of K a year recreational, anyway more serious in 2022 but still not huge sums. 2022: Jan to end of June +10K July 1 to now -6 or 7K ish. So up etc, but done absolutes in recently, no doubt triggering a review their end. Anyway contacted by the responsible gambling team, all nicey nicey with me, I hope you are having a great day sir, are you ok? Me yeah im great what a nice day it is pal bla bla (had just done bollox day before!!) .Anyway for 30 mins I think im possibly gunna be ok here, trying to give model answers to shyt like, is the cost of living effecting you negatively? Is covid effecting you in a bad way? Does social media effect your gambling badly? Is gambling taking over your life? What are you doing betting at 2am (a golf event was settled at that time ), customer services couldnt grasp time placed and time settled.Anyway if the conversation was 30 minutes long it was probably discussed at minute 29:30, sorry sir 1 more thing to tell you about...we will be putting a 100 pound loss limit a month on your account until you can provide us with proof of funds and affordability via wage slips etc. The reason for this post is yes probably goodbye from here, I will not continue to post between races I will no longer pay any attention to, but more so does anyone have a decent solution to...can we see your wage slips etc etc? I will not provide them, got a decent level of savings but dont necessarily want to show them either. If its a choice of show them or lose the account itll be the latter unless I get mega bored in winter. "Weve sent you an email with what you need to do sir"...24h later classic BF, NO EMAIL!!! Again this post isn't really to say goodbye its more to confirm what has already been said above, they are coming for everyone, no matter what the situation of your punting. If your methods of punting can be quite volatile and you are desperate to keep going I would employ a slightly safer stratergy punting wise or be trapped in the net. Go well all. Can find me on gambling twitter (better that you can put a face to a name anyway) |
|
By:
Crazy. Anyone with common sense, punting knowledge and customer history over a few years (sometimes less) can spot a problem gambler.
|
|
By:
If you had done your dough on the machines you probably would have got a few extra spins instead of a phone call.
|