Affordability check trigger
|
By:
TM, I don't know if you have read what Geoff Banks has had to say about the issue on twitter, but apparently he no longer has a "casino" on his website, and he's been asking why the big bookies haven't pushed back against the checks, perhaps through a legal challenge, for example, but maybe your theory would explain it.
|
|
By:
Asked my local Fred shop manager about AFCs told if customiser bets £500 A Day they have have a quiet word if £3k a week its the
Full Monty. How does that stack up to the on-line checks. |
|
By:
Has anybody who lost large amounts of Money that they clearly could not Afford ,ever been refunded the losses ? Been loads of cases of massive unchecked losses,
in fact Encouraged by the Firm Losses ... The answer I believe is no .. |
|
By:
George - pretty much all of the evidence points to my theory being correct.
The horse racing industry and certainly betting on racing are (sadly imo) dying (much of it is self inflicted), I think it will all but die with our generation (quite literally as we die!). The future as far as the "bookmakers" are concerned is gaming. It's low cost, high margin, available 24/7, available absolutely everywhere and most crucially available to everybody (not just older men) - It's highly addictive, yet it;s attractive to women. The development of the technology means absolutely everybody is a potential "player". It's massive and it poses a huge threat to traditional "gambling" and definetely to horse racing. |
|
By:
In a nutshell - (if the animal rights people don't get there first) the "bookmakers" via gaming (and the mortality of people of a certain age) will kill horse racing.
It's already at the stage where "bookmakers" only tolerate it because they can exploit it as a gateway. |
|
By:
GEORGE.B • February 7, 2023 12:41 PM GMT
dave1357, run that one past me again, why are we seeing thousands of excess deaths I've already answered that, the last time you asked. |
|
By:
And if that was the thread about the chap dying, why would I get it removed? I was at the racecourse and commented due to that.
|
|
By:
in all probability betfair thought your lies were in bad taste.
|
|
By:
Well can you answer it again please because someone got the thread removed.
I was basing it on your past history of getting my posts removed, the ones that had been directed at *YOU*. You know the ones, where I exposed you as Dave the Labeller, and pointed out that you were the forum's number one narrative cucumber sucker. |
|
By:
Many at Westminster want horse racing gone ....if they cant stop the racing taking place ....stopping the gambling that keeps the sport afloat will do the job nicely......
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
GEORGE.B • February 7, 2023 1:16 PM GMT
Well can you answer it again please 90% of excess deaths are people over age 60, who are likely not getting or not seeking timely health care. total deaths uk 6th to 20th january: 48168, 60 or over 44015. Old people die in the winter and this increases when they don't get the right treatment. |
|
By:
'Likely' is a bit tenuous dave. Last year they tried saying people hadn't been getting statins and heart drugs during the lockdown years. Official numbers are out now and statin prescriptions actually increased during that time.
|
|
By:
I'm going to report that post George.B if that's what you want? why don't you toddle back to your fantasy betting thread, where there is no chance whatsoever that you would be able to get those bets on.
|
|
By:
Off topic
10% cancer cases are under 50, and they prolly have better survival rates. Cancer is more common in women up to the age of 55. Cancer is more common in men over 55 80% of heart disease deaths are people over 65. Keep moving and eat well 90% of excess deaths over 60. Sounds reasonable |
|
By:
Don't report it dave1357, I want everyone to see it, though obviously you have the right to reply.
As for my "fantasy betting threads", as my regular reader will testify, at the end of each thread I do publish a table of results which includes the P/L at Betfair SP after commission. For example, last season's thread was +180 at the "fantasy" prices, +94 at BSP after commission. The current one is +13 and -7. |
|
By:
Average age of covid death was 82 and we made great effort to save them. Now excess deaths of over 60s is accepted as reasonable, it's a funny old world.
|
|
By:
George and dave - both forum contributors that I enjoy reading - when the topic is betting, racing, horses, etc.
  |
|
By:
You are obviously fine at picking horses, but there is no chance you would get bog and in all probability would be restricted to pennies on extra place races.
saddo who says it's reasonable? |
|
By:
saddo, here's the thing, in 2020 their own commissioned report told them that their lockdown policies would cost lives.
So at "best", *THEY* decided to play God, and sacrifice the lives of younger people in order to save the lives of "vulnerable" people. That's the best spin one could put on it. And yet despite being in full knowledge of what would be the costs of their lockdown policies in 2020, they still went ahead and had another one. And all the while, while they themselves, by their very actions eg car rides to test eyesight, parties, affairs, etc...told us that they had no fear of covid 19. So what was really going on? The threat of mandated jabs. Care workers sacked. Drs / nurses threatened with the sack. This novel medical procedure forced upon children after they'd said it wouldn't be. etc |
|
By:
I've always thought it was a giant cluster f*ck George. Blind panic took charge and not conspiracy, common sense was suspended for two years. I still believe that is probably true.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
but that's not to say I believe in any of the conspiracy and vaccine nonsense that does the rounds. Vaccines will have saved loads of lives both directly and indirectly. It's locking down that I disagreed with.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
I see that Paul Scully has moved on! - So probably even more delays to the white paper.
Not seen anything yet on who takes over the "gambling brief" from him - but whoever it is will be the 6th person to do so since the gambling review was announced. And people wonder why the govt can't get anything done!  |
|
By:
I found out today their all Multiple reasons for the Affordability check trigger. But after a lot of work, I found out the main reason. It's a "Credit Check" I just wanted to let the forum know.
|
|
By:
that's interesting - quite a lot of older people don't borrow so their credit score declines. It is well worth using a credit card for shopping and online purchases, paying off the whole balance each month by direct debit.
|
|
By:
I check my Credit Report occasionally and I have never seen a search by any gambling company (I onlu use exchanges)
|
|
By:
there is some sort of soft check that doesn't show up, I think.
|
|
By:
quite a lot of older people don't borrow so their credit score declines Bingo!
|
|
By:
Soft inquiries do not affect credit scores and are not visible to potential lenders that may review your credit reports. They are visible to you and will stay on your credit reports for 12 to 24 months, depending on the type. The other type of inquiry is a “hard” inquiry.
So you should actually be able to see them Brian, but others don't. |
|
By:
I will share something with the forum, Poker related: 888 UK Limited ( Cosmos, Cval, R) Date 27Dec 2022 Reason For Credit Check Gambling Affordability Assessment
|
|
By:
Just to clarify ^ Above was on my credit file.
|
|
By:
Would deserve a lol if it was indeed the case that not having / using a credit card or other loans would be used as evidence that a punter is betting more than they can afford
|
|
By:
So if you're laden with debt but pay it off regular then everything is ok. Beware of not borrowing money it seems.
|
|
By:
Little chance of the jobless propunter obtaining a credit card.
 |
|
By:
sparrow...Yes, sadly in the mad, modern world, you are correct.
I am 63 and am financially secure and wealthy by the standards of most, but still take out loans (interest free) from time to time so as to retain my 999 out of 1000 credit rating. When I was young, if you had loans it counted against you. But now it is the opposite. I keep on and on and on about this, but until us older brigade come to realise that things are now run by the young FOR the young, using the standards (often low) OF the young, the madness will continue. The young just don't realise that many older people have large sums behind them but keep their income low so as to avoid higher rate tax. Hence the affordability checks are geared towards income and credit ratings. God knows how many older customers with money the bookies are losing because of their stupidity and fear of the gambling commission. |
|
By:
It does have some unusual side effects using this metric, but it’s not a bad one.
To measure how reliable a person is and how competent with money they are it works quite well, but not perfect. As Dave suggests, a credit card paid off in full is advisable (quite honestly I don’t know why people don’t have this setup already, buy everything through the CC and get extra protection on fraud and even make a bit of cash back , though this isn’t great these days still adds up) It’s tru you can even have too good a score, MoneyBox on radio 4 have covered it several times where banks and card providers don’t want customers who they make so little from. But I can’t see gambling turning their noses up at having too good a score. |
|
By:
For those of you (dusty) that are still too blinded by their political beliefs, to see that the current panic stricken ("intrusive and Draconian") mess has been inflicted pretty much single handedly by bookmakers:
Meanwhile, Gambling Commission chief executive Andrew Rhodes has claimed there has been a "significant amount of misinformation" about the regulator's position on affordability checks. In a speech at the World Regulatory Briefing at the Ice gambling industry show in London he claimed the commission had not imposed affordability checks or set limits on what bettors should be allowed to spend. He added: "What we have done is make it clear we do expect operators to consider a range of factors when assessing the risk for a consumer, including the financial situation for a consumer. "It is for operators to set limits themselves based on their customer types, business and risks." |
|
By:
What we have done is make it clear we do expect operators to consider a range of factors when assessing the risk for a consumer, including the financial situation for a consumer.
And what do they expect companies to do as a result of this expectation? Obviously ask for the information that they need to assess the financial situation. |