There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 493 comments are related to the topic:
Gambling white paper: Gamblers losing £1,000 a day to face checks
Gambling white paper: Gamblers losing £1,000 a day to face checks
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 493
|
By:
1st time, I can see a lot of different ways in which the affordability checks encourage you to bet a lot more rather than less. And they'll probably push you into dabbling in a greater range of markets, many of which you'll know rather less about than your bread and butter...
|
|
By:
affordability checks encourage you to bet a lot more rather than less. Bingo! The fact is, Casinos and bookmakers are rubbing their hands.
|
|
By:
What a pathetic response dustbin. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
|
|
By:
And its easy to find out. Just look at share prices, thats all you need to know!
|
|
By:
[i] sparrow • April 27, 2023 12:58 PM BST
You got zero clue. |
|
By:
Yup Trident. The Government have been played, and we'll be the losers.
|
|
By:
It's going to be hilarious watching these numpties trying to implement all this bollox , maybe £999 will turn out to be the new Grand and surely the data protection act will become a farce to enforce these personally proposed parameters.
|
|
By:
its a bit like the old days of 10 30 last orders,11 0 clock throwing out time so some bought 3 pints at 10 30,
 |
|
By:
Its ridiculous.
Even if you hit the limits of losing 2k within 3 months, which most people will at some point. What then? How much do you need to earn for that to be ok? What if you are retired? What if you are asset rich but cash poor? what if you are a house wife/husband? What if you are between jobs or have taken redundancy? There are countless examples of people who wont be able to prove their income. And then what? What if you lose another grand? Nobody even knows what the checks mean. They just blart out that checks are required, without stating exactly what they are checking for. If a professional footballer loses £10k, is that ok as they earn plenty? Most of the addicts who cry the most about their losses are all high earning millionaires anyway, who could, by definition, have afforded it. Handing over bank statements is one thing, but what exactly do they need to see? How much do you have to earn to lose a grand in a day? Its badly thought out, and unworkable. |
|
By:
I would imagine the ante post markets will be severely hit
I like an ante post bet with the local bookmakers and sometimes lay off with Betfair Im not keen on handing on my info to a cowboy outfit  |
|
By:
When the consultations start, it is really important that the concept of a bankroll set aside for gambling is accepted. Use of variable staking based on the bankroll and odds available along with reduction in bet size after losses to preserve the bankroll, is the absolute epitome of responsible gambling.
So if you are in the low income/decent savings bracket and want to keep betting, take the opportunity when it comes. |
|
By:
the paper starts with...
"In general, this government agrees with the principle that people should be free to spend their money how they see fit" and then every word after that is a total contradiction of this statement |
|
By:
Philip Davis asked questions, but as usual no answers were forthcoming.
|
|
By:
'These enhanced checks are narrowly targeted and we estimate only around 3% of online gambling accounts will be affected. Our intention is that these checks will also be frictionless for customers and conducted online by credit reference agencies or through other means such as open banking in the first instance. Further information will only be requested from customers as a last resort where it is necessary to complete an assessment, and the use of any data gathered through such checks will be restricted to assessing financial risk and indicators of financial distress. Operators will be required to respond appropriately to any identified risks on a case-by-case basis, taking into account all the information they know about the customer, but it is not the intent that government or the Gambling Commission should set a blanket rule on how much of their income adults should be able to spend on gambling.'
If you win lifetime, and or have capital in the bank how can anyone stop you from gambling on that premise above? |
|
By:
Also from my reading, they have focussed on an upheaval of the complaints body. So if you lose 2k over 90 days, get checked, show capital and they still dont let you continue, can you then take the operator to this newly empowered body?
|
|
By:
lol he'll tell you to gtf
|
|
By:
Unless we can get agreement that an amount of savings/former winnings specifically set aside for gambling is acceptable, the checks will be based on disposable income.
|
|
By:
Presumably if you are a foreigner the checks wont apply
Just change citizenship to IRELAND |
|
By:
They have mentioned disposable income and I agree pressure needs to be applied for clarity.
But from reading the spirit of these restrictions, and having showed you arnt in financial difficulty, I dont see how anyone can stop you. |
|
By:
Thats obv no compensation to those scratching around betting for fun or just about coping.
|
|
By:
Whole thing is a shambles. But I will say this and many will think the same. Let all the racecourses close and all trainers and all bookies go out of business. All problems sorted.
|
|
By:
What a load of codswallop? Nothing immediate eg a total ban on betting adverts on the media esp laptop and mobile, and succinct. Instead, more consultation after several years of procrastination.
The bookies have won! Their lobbyists have done a superb job! |
|
By:
so if I win £5k this week and lose over £1k next week what happens?
|
|
By:
I dont see how anyone can stop you.
lol They will just suspend your account. There is utterly no reason for them to do otherwise and they know you can't do anything. |
|
By:
Keep your balances high people.. minimal withdrawals and as long as at the end of each period you are in profit, nothing changes.
|
|
By:
Keep your balances high people..
that doesn't matter under these proposals - it's losses not deposits. |
|
By:
4. Dispute resolution and consumer redress
Why have they gone to the trouble of making a whole section on it then? |
|
By:
All it does do will make it far more competitive as the only ones left will be those whose accounts are in profit. Will be like a death race series
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
dave1357.. get real.. If someone on here has a balance of say 100k, that can be evidenced to have been a lifetime profit, they are not going to be able to stop that person using any part of that balance to bet with at all. Any new money deposited that is lost will count towards the figure
|
|
By:
If they do they they can, then there will be 100 court cases going on every day against both the companies and the government.
|
|
By:
I take it this is all "NET"
|
|
By:
do think they can..
|
|
By:
I take it this is all "NET" You would hope so but in clown world its entirely possible they didn't think of that and its not
|
|
By:
now wheres that switch!!! • April 27, 2023 1:58 PM BST
dave1357.. get real.. If someone on here has a balance of say 100k, that can be evidenced to have been a lifetime profit, they are not going to be able to stop that person using any part of that balance to bet with at all. Any new money deposited that is lost will count towards the figure Two things They say losses in day/90 days. If you don't think a company would be delighted to shut down a winner, you're deluded. As I'm sick of writing. We have to get the GC to specifically say that a bankroll set aside for gambling is evidence of affordability. |
|
By:
Although I wish it would count I don't see how lifetime profit would make any difference, that was then, this is now, there'll be no assumption that whatever contributed to previous wins is still in place, the player would have to show that by continuing to win,it will be a clean slate from now going forward.
|
|
By:
I think if that was tested in court they would lose each case. Gambling is a legal activity. I guess the companies could operate from offshore and we all use VPN's to access?
|
|
By:
Duffy, because a lifetime profit figure is real money in the bank, showing an income from a job (which can be lost at any moment due to illness or a change in the world) is far riskier.
|
|
By:
The books have used all this as a cloak to be able to target players that they don't want under the guise of "welfare", I still think that will continue to happen, at the end of the day they can restrict who they want whether those people deserve it or not, it's their ball and if they don't want you then tough.
They've got the States opening up, it's no skin off their nose. |
