Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
...consultation feedback
ANOTHER FRED SOZ
The Gambling Commission has set out the next steps for affordability checks, including a pilot of the enhanced tier of checks being proposed by the government.
The news comes just days before the key debate on the issue in Westminster Hall on Monday in response to the petition calling for the controversial checks to be scrapped.
A full response to the consultation the Gambling Commission ran on affordability checks last year is due to be published by the industry regulator next month. However, in a blog post on the regulator's website on Thursday, the commission's executive director Tim Miller gave an update on its approach to the two levels of what it describes as "financial risk checks" included in the government's gambling white paper last year.
At the lower level, customers would be subject to checks at a net spend of just £125 over 30 days or £500 in a year, focusing on publicly available data.
Miller revealed that following feedback through the consultation, this tier of checks will not require bookmakers to consider a customer's details such as postcode or job title.
He added: "To ease the introduction of these checks they will initially come into force at a higher threshold for a short period of time, before reverting to a lower threshold later in the year to smooth implementation for consumers."
The second tier of 'financial risk' assessments are proposed to kick in if a punter runs up a net loss of £1,000 in 24 hours or £2,000 within 90 days, and would entail more detailed checks of a customer's finances.
The government has promised such checks would be frictionless, although at present no frictionless method of finding such information is available.
Miller, who said checks would be frictionless "for the vast majority of customers who undergo them", added the commission agreed with consultation responses supporting a pilot of such a scheme, adding it would "enable us to test the details of data-sharing in practice, working with credit reference agencies and gambling businesses".
The pilot is set to run for approximately four to six months and operators will not be expected to act on the data they receive, although they will be expected to continue to implement existing safety measures.
In what might be a sign of success from racing's lobbying efforts, Miller said: "We will continue to gather data which will inform the final thresholds and definitions of loss or spend for implementation following the pilot period."
More details will be set out in the Gambling Commission's full response document.
The commission and betting operators are also working on an interim system of uniform checks until a truly frictionless solution is found, but there was no mention of progress on that in the blog.
In response to the news, a Betting and Gaming Council spokesperson, said: "The BGC has consistently called for frictionless, enhanced spending checks online, so those showing signs of financial vulnerability can receive swift, targeted interventions.
“It is essential enhanced spending checks online do not interfere with the vast majority who bet safely and responsibly, so they can continue enjoying their hobby without unnecessary intrusion. It is crucial no check is introduced which risks driving those who do bet safely and responsibly to the growing unsafe, unregulated gambling black market online.
"We continue to work closely with the government and Gambling Commission and believe there should be a robust and comprehensive pilot before any enhanced spending checks are introduced."
The government is also shortly expected to announce a new maximum £2 online slot stake for 18 to 24-year-olds, with a £5 limit for those aged over 25 bringing stakes in line with casinos.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/gambling-review/gambling-commission-announces-pilot-scheme-for-enhanced-tier-of-affordability-checks-in-response-to-consultation-feedback-auXJ14s24p2G/
ANOTHER FRED SOZ
The Gambling Commission has set out the next steps for affordability checks, including a pilot of the enhanced tier of checks being proposed by the government.
The news comes just days before the key debate on the issue in Westminster Hall on Monday in response to the petition calling for the controversial checks to be scrapped.
A full response to the consultation the Gambling Commission ran on affordability checks last year is due to be published by the industry regulator next month. However, in a blog post on the regulator's website on Thursday, the commission's executive director Tim Miller gave an update on its approach to the two levels of what it describes as "financial risk checks" included in the government's gambling white paper last year.
At the lower level, customers would be subject to checks at a net spend of just £125 over 30 days or £500 in a year, focusing on publicly available data.
Miller revealed that following feedback through the consultation, this tier of checks will not require bookmakers to consider a customer's details such as postcode or job title.
He added: "To ease the introduction of these checks they will initially come into force at a higher threshold for a short period of time, before reverting to a lower threshold later in the year to smooth implementation for consumers."
The second tier of 'financial risk' assessments are proposed to kick in if a punter runs up a net loss of £1,000 in 24 hours or £2,000 within 90 days, and would entail more detailed checks of a customer's finances.
The government has promised such checks would be frictionless, although at present no frictionless method of finding such information is available.
Miller, who said checks would be frictionless "for the vast majority of customers who undergo them", added the commission agreed with consultation responses supporting a pilot of such a scheme, adding it would "enable us to test the details of data-sharing in practice, working with credit reference agencies and gambling businesses".
The pilot is set to run for approximately four to six months and operators will not be expected to act on the data they receive, although they will be expected to continue to implement existing safety measures.
In what might be a sign of success from racing's lobbying efforts, Miller said: "We will continue to gather data which will inform the final thresholds and definitions of loss or spend for implementation following the pilot period."
More details will be set out in the Gambling Commission's full response document.
The commission and betting operators are also working on an interim system of uniform checks until a truly frictionless solution is found, but there was no mention of progress on that in the blog.
In response to the news, a Betting and Gaming Council spokesperson, said: "The BGC has consistently called for frictionless, enhanced spending checks online, so those showing signs of financial vulnerability can receive swift, targeted interventions.
“It is essential enhanced spending checks online do not interfere with the vast majority who bet safely and responsibly, so they can continue enjoying their hobby without unnecessary intrusion. It is crucial no check is introduced which risks driving those who do bet safely and responsibly to the growing unsafe, unregulated gambling black market online.
"We continue to work closely with the government and Gambling Commission and believe there should be a robust and comprehensive pilot before any enhanced spending checks are introduced."
The government is also shortly expected to announce a new maximum £2 online slot stake for 18 to 24-year-olds, with a £5 limit for those aged over 25 bringing stakes in line with casinos.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/gambling-review/gambling-commission-announces-pilot-scheme-for-enhanced-tier-of-affordability-checks-in-response-to-consultation-feedback-auXJ14s24p2G/
Show More
Probably Roggrain. I dont care, I'm 85 and sick of the way this country is going. I will give any of these useless politicians and people in power a fight. F**k the lot of em.
I cant wait for a bookmaker to refuse me my money because I will take them to court even if it costs me more than they owe me.
I cant wait for a bookmaker to refuse me my money because I will take them to court even if it costs me more than they owe me.
@clacton
"Why dont they ask for documents when you deposit. It seems to happen when we withdraw . "
I would guess that because it is not yet legally/regulatory mandated, they expect that if they single-handedly introduce document checks at deposit, punters will simply walk away and open an account with a rival who does not perform such checks?
"Why dont they ask for documents when you deposit. It seems to happen when we withdraw . "
I would guess that because it is not yet legally/regulatory mandated, they expect that if they single-handedly introduce document checks at deposit, punters will simply walk away and open an account with a rival who does not perform such checks?
Probably right longbridge. If they take money from a card why would they need to see any documents to put it back on the same card.
Like I said above, refuse to pay me and they will end up in court. I wont be giving any bookmaker any documents.
They just dont seem to like losing a few quid. Yet they put their idiot reps on TV telling us how much they have laid one for. It will soon be happening at Cheltenham.
They will lay big money to people who are more in the know than we are. They must think we are fools.
Like I said above, refuse to pay me and they will end up in court. I wont be giving any bookmaker any documents.
They just dont seem to like losing a few quid. Yet they put their idiot reps on TV telling us how much they have laid one for. It will soon be happening at Cheltenham.
They will lay big money to people who are more in the know than we are. They must think we are fools.
I would guess that because it is not yet legally/regulatory mandated
It's not mandated, but it is UKGC guidance.
It's not mandated, but it is UKGC guidance.
They use their smart phones for all transactions, even for such things as bus fares.
Interestingly, if you take the bus from Northallerton to Darlington they'll only take cash
Interestingly, if you take the bus from Northallerton to Darlington they'll only take cash
Clacton it is betfair..i think i have the same mindset as you with regards taking them to court .This nonsense has to stop , you would think that someone with half a brain cell high up in the company must realize that this is costing them a lot of money..
Clacton on another thread longbridge advised me they could withhold funds under anti money laundering rules apparently .He used to work in the city .My bets are mainly on the exchange.
So any bookmaker can come up with nonsense like that can they. I would not hesitate taking them to court.
In fact I half hope it happens. I would love to be near a bookmakers rep in court. They would get some verbal from me.
In fact I half hope it happens. I would love to be near a bookmakers rep in court. They would get some verbal from me.
I actually asked them if i would be able to withdraw my funds after they advised me i had to provide verification by the 29th January.i asked will i be able to withdraw my money if I’m suspended , i was advised to just keep betting and it wouldn’t be a problem .my account was suspended on 6 th February I think .I have been typing to them ever since on that stupid chat thing they have .They continually tell me to download documents which I counter with I’m not going to .The TEAM whoever they are ,are looking into it and will email with a response.21 days later still waiting !
I will let you know when I get a response ,if I live long enough!!! Has your account be suspended?
No my account is OK. Ive always thought that betting on an exchange would not come up with all the nonsense. But it seems it happens with all of them. Cant understand why they create all these problems, it just makes extra work for them.
Would'nt it be nice if one of the two racing channels asked these rancid companies a few questions. It wont happen because they are up the bookmakers a***'s.
Would'nt it be nice if one of the two racing channels asked these rancid companies a few questions. It wont happen because they are up the bookmakers a***'s.
Truth seems to be very offensive to a lot of people these days ,so those questions will never be asked .Good luck with your punting ventures and I hope you are not subjected to this nonsense.Be aware that if you do get the message to verify by a certain date ,the account will be frozen .I think my notice said the 29 th Jan and I was suspended on the 5 th February.My advice would be to withdraw your funds on or very close to the date they give for verification.
"They use their smart phones for all transactions, even for such things as bus fares.
Interestingly, if you take the bus from Northallerton to Darlington they'll only take cash"
Buses in London have only taken smartcards, phones or contactless for years; speeds up the boarding no end.
Interestingly, if you take the bus from Northallerton to Darlington they'll only take cash"
Buses in London have only taken smartcards, phones or contactless for years; speeds up the boarding no end.
You can not tell people how to spend their money.its called CIVIL LIABILITIES ,AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL Will drag anyone through the courts who think otherwise.ENG OF STORY.
Well I hope I dont get any verify requests. If I do and my money is not back in my bank I will tell them they are going to court. I wont be arguing with them.
I have been betting over 70 years and I never thought I would see the day when it was difficult to get a bet on. The Government, Gambling Commission and the bookmakers have ruined peoples entertainment and some who try to make a living from betting. They can have as many General Elections as they like, I wont be voting for any of them. Worst bunch of MP's this country has ever had.
I hope you get your money back, but I would start looking at the small claims court if I was you.
I have been betting over 70 years and I never thought I would see the day when it was difficult to get a bet on. The Government, Gambling Commission and the bookmakers have ruined peoples entertainment and some who try to make a living from betting. They can have as many General Elections as they like, I wont be voting for any of them. Worst bunch of MP's this country has ever had.
I hope you get your money back, but I would start looking at the small claims court if I was you.
Small Claims procedure by all means - though I think it will only get you the satisfaction of putting them to the trouble, rather than seeing your money again. And it is not without cost (albeit not hugely expensive).
and it also breaks a CV law of "freedom of choice"And thats another story that AI will drag anyone through the courts who think otherwise.
I would go there even if it cost me more than I was owed. I dont see how you can lose. They have to prove there is a reason for not paying.
It would also be nice to stand next to a bookmakers rep and tell him some truths. And maybe kick him in a tender place.
Its time these people were shown up.
It would also be nice to stand next to a bookmakers rep and tell him some truths. And maybe kick him in a tender place.
Its time these people were shown up.
I can see how you can lose. And lose at the paper stage before you get close enough to a bookie's rep to tell him anything.
They will say "yes, we have Mr Clacton's money. We are only to happy to give it to him, but we are a regulated industry and to comply with our (insert your choice of AML, ATF, KYC) regulations set down by the UKGC, we require some paperwork first. We have repeatedly asked Mr Clacton for that paperwork and he has consistently refused to provide it".
They will say "yes, we have Mr Clacton's money. We are only to happy to give it to him, but we are a regulated industry and to comply with our (insert your choice of AML, ATF, KYC) regulations set down by the UKGC, we require some paperwork first. We have repeatedly asked Mr Clacton for that paperwork and he has consistently refused to provide it".
and he replies
Our rules say that a gambling business can't ask you to prove your age and identity as a condition of withdrawing your money if they could have asked you at an earlier point. However, there may be occasions where a gambling business can only ask you for information at that time in order to fulfil legal obligations.
If a gambling business needs more information before you can withdraw your funds, for example, for anti-money laundering checks, then they should ask promptly and not only when you want to withdraw your funds.
Where a gambling business delays a request to withdraw funds due to insufficient ID, they may be in breach of Licence Condition 17 – Customer identity verification and may be subject to regulatory action.
Our rules say that a gambling business can't ask you to prove your age and identity as a condition of withdrawing your money if they could have asked you at an earlier point. However, there may be occasions where a gambling business can only ask you for information at that time in order to fulfil legal obligations.
If a gambling business needs more information before you can withdraw your funds, for example, for anti-money laundering checks, then they should ask promptly and not only when you want to withdraw your funds.
Where a gambling business delays a request to withdraw funds due to insufficient ID, they may be in breach of Licence Condition 17 – Customer identity verification and may be subject to regulatory action.
https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/public-and-players/guide/age-and-id-verification
.
.
Does someone want to try it and see how it pans out?
I dont see what giving bookmakers documents proves. What is it they want to know. They asked you questions to allow you to open an account.
They didnt query anything when you deposited money from your card.
What else is there?
They didnt query anything when you deposited money from your card.
What else is there?
clacton, “the law is an ass”
You will not win in court!
You will not win in court!
Some of you give up too easily. Ive been told all that in other problems and ive proved them all wrong.
Anyway ive not got any document problems yet.
Anyway ive not got any document problems yet.
it is absolutely clear from the gambling commission rules/guidance that they can't hold on to money unless there are exceptional circumstances. You would not lose a court case.
I would have thought that if you took them to court, the moment it was established that they did not ask for documents on deposit and only on withdraw it would be case closed in your favour....it would have to be, it just takes someone to do it and set that precedent.
I agree Duffy and Dave. I just dont see what documents would decide anything.
If I ever get into that position i'll do it. And i'll make sure the media know all about it. Its time we started fighting back against these bookmakers.
If I ever get into that position i'll do it. And i'll make sure the media know all about it. Its time we started fighting back against these bookmakers.
clacton 27 Feb 24 16:50
I agree Duffy and Dave. I just dont see what documents would decide anything.
If I ever get into that position i'll do it. And i'll make sure the media know all about it. Its time we started fighting back against these bookmakers.
1 month sabbatical from punting,every punter,they would be begging…..of course the fodder could never do that so I’m afraid it’s fodder to the slaughter…..
I agree Duffy and Dave. I just dont see what documents would decide anything.
If I ever get into that position i'll do it. And i'll make sure the media know all about it. Its time we started fighting back against these bookmakers.
1 month sabbatical from punting,every punter,they would be begging…..of course the fodder could never do that so I’m afraid it’s fodder to the slaughter…..
Yes Formoftheace ive often thought of that. Of course it will never happen.
I cant understand why bookmakers are trying all the time to get rid of their clients. Either by restrictions or the document nonsense.
Tried to have a £1 ew double last Saturday with Hills. They wouldnt take it. So they lost another punter.
Cant work it out. What are they scared of.
I cant understand why bookmakers are trying all the time to get rid of their clients. Either by restrictions or the document nonsense.
Tried to have a £1 ew double last Saturday with Hills. They wouldnt take it. So they lost another punter.
Cant work it out. What are they scared of.
Kindred spirits Quixall and Jaywick, plenty to say but not a clue what they are howling about!!
If by saying Jaywick you mean me, what exactly have I said that you think is not right
Easier to deduce what you have said that is right, why wait until now to state WH refused you £1 ew for example?
Btw go to Court for your objection to T & Cs and GC guidelines and you will lose!! HTH
Btw go to Court for your objection to T & Cs and GC guidelines and you will lose!! HTH
People like you have got no guts.
Whats wrong stating that Hills refused a poxy £2 bet.
Are you Hendersons bookmaker.
All you do is object to everything anyone has to say. FOYSC
Whats wrong stating that Hills refused a poxy £2 bet.
Are you Hendersons bookmaker.
All you do is object to everything anyone has to say. FOYSC
Clayton, the bookmaker is running scared petrified of the vomit inducing fines so to close an account and make them look good…..hoping Kim Jong (GC) are watching them being a good boy….
Leave horse racing and sports betting out of the shambles and get rid of all arcade material,which “tampered “ (imo)..
Leave horse racing and sports betting out of the shambles and get rid of all arcade material,which “tampered “ (imo)..
ROFL, now try another user name and try not to be so obvious?
CagliariG 27 Feb 24 18:49
Kindred spirits Quixall and Jaywick, plenty to say but not a clue what they are howling about!!
Einstein 2nd,do you honestly think if Kim Jong tries for a minimum stake and account closures the government and people in high places in the racing/breeding world will sit back and yawn……ffs
Kindred spirits Quixall and Jaywick, plenty to say but not a clue what they are howling about!!
Einstein 2nd,do you honestly think if Kim Jong tries for a minimum stake and account closures the government and people in high places in the racing/breeding world will sit back and yawn……ffs
Feb 27, 2024 -- 7:16PM, CagliariG wrote:
ROFL, now try another user name and try not to be so obvious?
What does all this crap mean.
Another case rested for you Quixall, no more benefit of any doubt, you are not only a failed punter but incapable of a meaningful debate about current issues!!
HTH
HTH
Lol……yeah,the GC will be hush hush shortly regarding horse racing…..trust me…
I reckon it will be hushed back to normal before Cheltenham…….
fwiw the only time i've resorted to small claims threats was with ok corrals. kept playing bertie big bananas saying "we have your money, it's ours now" etc. bit of back and forward, gave up, letter before action. phone call from a manager a few days later, we got your letter, sorry for the confusion, money will be in your a/c tomorrow.
When the account you are asking them to pay into is the same as the one you used to make deposits
why can't they accept that as irrefutable evidence that you are entitled to the money?
why can't they accept that as irrefutable evidence that you are entitled to the money?
why can't they accept that as irrefutable evidence that you are entitled to the money?
b'cos they're untrustworthy cnts ...
b'cos they're untrustworthy cnts ...
Are you all thick or just unaware?
Not that long ago when a scumbag was nicked simply using a stolen card to place bets, the lady who owned it reported the increase in her bank balance to the investigating officers who then arrested the low life who stole it and had a good run, albeit could not access the winnings.
Sounds like he might actually be posting on here, btw the Lady lived in Cheltenham, ironic or not?
Not that long ago when a scumbag was nicked simply using a stolen card to place bets, the lady who owned it reported the increase in her bank balance to the investigating officers who then arrested the low life who stole it and had a good run, albeit could not access the winnings.
Sounds like he might actually be posting on here, btw the Lady lived in Cheltenham, ironic or not?
I go into town 5 days a week and visit my favourite coffee shop. That's £3.80 a day 5 days a week 52
weeks a year. That's £988.00 per annum. Clearly I am a problem caffeine drinker. I wonder if the
proprietor of the establishment will request an affordability check!
weeks a year. That's £988.00 per annum. Clearly I am a problem caffeine drinker. I wonder if the
proprietor of the establishment will request an affordability check!
You need to be locked up roggrain for your own safety paying for shyte that a coffee bean never shook hand with!!
I wonder if the proprietor of the establishment will request an affordability check!
no, but because someone stole £20k from the company safe and spunked the lot on coffee the whole country have to prove they can afford £3.80 a day ...
no, but because someone stole £20k from the company safe and spunked the lot on coffee the whole country have to prove they can afford £3.80 a day ...
I go to a proper coffee shop Gagliarig not one of the big commercial enterprises that serve something
that resembles dishwater!
that resembles dishwater!
ROFL rog, never would have guessed you would reply thus, 1 euro here for real coffee and 40 cents for your so called others on top, you are a genius btw My wife buys only Lavazza Rosso or Nero for 400 gms for less than your one cup!!!
Ah, Gag. You lucky person. Bet the Sardines are a lot better than here also and cheaper!
Think of the commercial possibilities: Sardine filled Cornish Pasties!
Philip Davis MP comments after the Minister had summed up
Andrew did not address many of the specific points made in the debate and told those present the Gambling Commission was "proceeding with the proposal for financial risk checks".
Davies, the Conservative MP for Shipley, said he regarded the attendance for the debate as a positive, and had taken encouragement from Andrew's comments about a willingness to examine ideas about the data being used in the checks and not wishing to push high net worth individuals away from racing.
However, he added: "What wasn't promising was that the minister basically made it clear they were going to crack on with affordability checks anyway, and pretty much at the levels that we're already envisaging. I think that was disappointing that in effect he didn't say, 'I hear the strength of feeling, I will go away and reflect on it'."
Andrew did not address many of the specific points made in the debate and told those present the Gambling Commission was "proceeding with the proposal for financial risk checks".
Davies, the Conservative MP for Shipley, said he regarded the attendance for the debate as a positive, and had taken encouragement from Andrew's comments about a willingness to examine ideas about the data being used in the checks and not wishing to push high net worth individuals away from racing.
However, he added: "What wasn't promising was that the minister basically made it clear they were going to crack on with affordability checks anyway, and pretty much at the levels that we're already envisaging. I think that was disappointing that in effect he didn't say, 'I hear the strength of feeling, I will go away and reflect on it'."
Of course,Clacton. The Minister has an agenda and no amount of so called 'consultation' will
have the slightest effect.
have the slightest effect.
So Clacton, Galiarig is from Gagliari. Are you from Clacton-on-Sea? If so then it won't be long due
to global warming (see posts below) that the sardines migrate to your waters!
to global warming (see posts below) that the sardines migrate to your waters!
Gagliari. Having to google many of the stuff you post has been quite an education. I now know for
instance what stargazy pie is !
instance what stargazy pie is !
I didn't see this but apparently they gave more air time to Peter Shilton and his wife
Geoff Banks
@geoffbanksbet
7.45pm
On GB News
Nigel Farage show
Discussing affordability checks on British gamblers
The thin edge of government controls on alcohol, smoking, eating, vaping.. all to follow this ‘test case’
I will do my best to represent punters, it appears no one is listening to them
Geoff Banks
@geoffbanksbet
7.45pm
On GB News
Nigel Farage show
Discussing affordability checks on British gamblers
The thin edge of government controls on alcohol, smoking, eating, vaping.. all to follow this ‘test case’
I will do my best to represent punters, it appears no one is listening to them
I can't see Geoff's clip on the GB News twitter feed but here are the Shiltons doing their pitch for ACs
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1762575066741518583
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1762575066741518583
It's going ahead as planned. That's it. End of Topic really. The Gambling Commission now call the shots.
And actually after all this 100 signatures rubbish and debate. I think we all knew affordability checks would continue. In fact, they have been already implemented by AI for 3 years or so.
LIke i have said before these quangos are not only anti gambling but also anti animal sports, they are populated by left wing, liberal, wet conservatives that have an agenda against any sport which includes the use of animals in sport.
They are not democratic and responsible only to there own agendas and ideas, they have a mission to convert the masses to there way of thinking for there own good.
When the next Govt comes in there attn will turn to Alcohol under the guise of a threat to public health.
They are not democratic and responsible only to there own agendas and ideas, they have a mission to convert the masses to there way of thinking for there own good.
When the next Govt comes in there attn will turn to Alcohol under the guise of a threat to public health.
I haven't bet in any high St shops for a couple of years, so I assume before I place a wager the person serving will let me know that if I am lucky enough to win a modest amount that I will be asked for certain personal documents BEFORE my bet is placed.?
.... Will they Phuck.! Good Luck Clacton.
.... Will they Phuck.! Good Luck Clacton.
Messed that up, should read that you should be informed BEFORE you place a bet that you may be asked for personal info before you can withdraw any potential winnings.
I watched the debate and found it very odd that the minister could read from a pre-prepared script after everyone had raised their concerns.
If that isn’t direct evidence that he had no intention of ‘listening’ then what is?
Hopefully it creates an opportunity for legal action.
If that isn’t direct evidence that he had no intention of ‘listening’ then what is?
Hopefully it creates an opportunity for legal action.
Organised crime will fill the void NAP !
Blokes WILL ALWAYS WANT TO BET ON SPORT...
George Orwell was so prophetic !
Blokes WILL ALWAYS WANT TO BET ON SPORT...
George Orwell was so prophetic !
Don't worry; Phillip Davies (the Bookmakers stooge) is married to the lovely Esther McVey and both the Daily Mail and the Daily Express are saying that she is the Minister for Common Sense.
So it all should be fine if he has a word with her, rather than just tell them where the bodies are buried!
So it all should be fine if he has a word with her, rather than just tell them where the bodies are buried!
And, ^^^^^ how about doing due diligence checks on Banks, Credit Card Company's, Finance House's who fall over themselves to lend the WRONG KIND OF PEOPLE MONEY !!!! ?...
IN NOVEMBER PLEASE, PLEASE DESTROY YOUR BALLOT PAPER BY PUTTING A LARGE CROSS THROUGH IT !!!
UNLESS, WE STICK TOGETHER WE'RE ALL COMPLETELY PHUCKED !
I MOVE.
IN NOVEMBER PLEASE, PLEASE DESTROY YOUR BALLOT PAPER BY PUTTING A LARGE CROSS THROUGH IT !!!
UNLESS, WE STICK TOGETHER WE'RE ALL COMPLETELY PHUCKED !
I MOVE.
Indeed, a choice (lol) between the government that wants to impose these draconian checks and the opposition that thinks they are not draconian enough
G B, I hate the political class ! They are not for us !
650 M P's down to 400 instantly ...
The House of Lords ABOLISHED !
I move.
650 M P's down to 400 instantly ...
The House of Lords ABOLISHED !
I move.
Here is Geoff Banks on the Nigel Farage show last night, and he tells Farage that he believes the Big Corp bookies are fully aligned with ACs, saying that they are drunk on data that enables them to profile and profit from their customers like never before.
Farage, appearing to be taken aback by this, responds by saying they will get 365 and the others to comment on this.
https://twitter.com/chrisgambler247/status/1762570173486166463
Or alternatively go to Geoff's twitter feed and click on the link.
Farage, appearing to be taken aback by this, responds by saying they will get 365 and the others to comment on this.
https://twitter.com/chrisgambler247/status/1762570173486166463
Or alternatively go to Geoff's twitter feed and click on the link.
Cheers George. Not saying that he (Geoff) doesn't have his own agenda and interests at heart - but it's interesting to hear his views. There's no such thing as a bookmaker any more (imo) but I suppose he is closer to being one than most of the big names with their wheels and reels.
I thought he did well to mention the Philippines! - I wouldn't trust any "bookmaker" with my full financials anyway - but knowing that all the big corporates will have sacrificed security/privacy etc for cost reasons (the same as their Customer Service), would be my biggest barrier to complying.
I thought he did well to mention the Philippines! - I wouldn't trust any "bookmaker" with my full financials anyway - but knowing that all the big corporates will have sacrificed security/privacy etc for cost reasons (the same as their Customer Service), would be my biggest barrier to complying.
Vote Reform.....i will be ....Cons and Lab will never get my vote again
Gambling Commission 'We have listened to your concerns but you can all go **** yourselves because we
are going to do what we think is morally right and you lot of degenerates will be saved! Praise the
Lord and Hallelujah!'
are going to do what we think is morally right and you lot of degenerates will be saved! Praise the
Lord and Hallelujah!'
Feb 28, 2024 -- 2:04PM, DancingBraveTheBest wrote:
Vote Reform.....i will be ....Cons and Lab will never get my vote again
Everyone i speak to have said that, i will be as well.
Lets hope they don't change there minds at the ballot box.
Shilton has been on gb news plenty, peddling his books.
He suffers from the de rigueur zeitgeist of the 21st century. If you screw up, it must be someone else's fault.
He suffers from the de rigueur zeitgeist of the 21st century. If you screw up, it must be someone else's fault.
Bit like the ex Arsenal player doing the lot then squawking……walk away quietly ffs and keep the nose out….
Cider28 Feb 24 16:55Joined: 29 Aug 02 | Topic/replies: 56,404 | Blogger: Cider's blog
He suffers from the de rigueur zeitgeist of the 21st century. If you screw up, it must be someone else's fault.
Bit like the jockey bashers
He suffers from the de rigueur zeitgeist of the 21st century. If you screw up, it must be someone else's fault.
Bit like the jockey bashers
The dark cloud hanging over the game…….who ever would have thought the punter would be backed into a corner trying to enjoy the game….
Fkn shambles……ITV and other media outlets will be on shortly pumping up Cheltenham and the start of the new turf season with lots to look forward to……but in the meantime Kim Jong is putting the steel between the shoulders of the punter……
Welcome to the cesspool (uk)…..
I noticed the punter on Simon Notts piece calling for arcade machines to be taken out….at least someone agrees..
Fkn shambles……ITV and other media outlets will be on shortly pumping up Cheltenham and the start of the new turf season with lots to look forward to……but in the meantime Kim Jong is putting the steel between the shoulders of the punter……
Welcome to the cesspool (uk)…..
I noticed the punter on Simon Notts piece calling for arcade machines to be taken out….at least someone agrees..
Will people leave in droves to purple if they don’t have the same rules ? Also will the PC charges be records losses on your account? (Betfair deleted this same post of mine previously)
The game is riddled with checks killing the desire…
Watch with interest if Kim Jong continues with its vomit inducing mission leading up to Newmarket in May and Royal Ascot two prestigious meetings with the dark cloud above….
Watch with interest if Kim Jong continues with its vomit inducing mission leading up to Newmarket in May and Royal Ascot two prestigious meetings with the dark cloud above….
purple will have the same checks if they are introduced. pc just reduces winnings and doesn't increase losses but illustrates the stupidity of the proposed rules when variance is considered, as a winning period (pc paid), followed by a losing period (check triggered), might have been under the threshold had the pc not been paid. When the player returns to profit, he won't pay pc for a bit till the recent losses are covered, but if his account is suspended, that won't happen.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539