BHA chair Joe Saumarez Smith has spoken out about his recent experiences of gambling checks imposed by bookmakers, having had his Betfair account suspended for nine days and others heavily restricted.
"It has been extremely frustrating," said the man who has chaired British racing's ruling body since 2022, adding that he hoped to prove to influential figures that the obstacles facing punters are real and operating as a major deterrent.
"I am no stranger to having accounts restricted," Saumarez Smith told the Racing Post, "but recent weeks have been particularly bad and it feels like operators are becoming more restrictive and fearful rather than less, exactly the reverse of what the Gambling Commission and the government are telling us is happening."
Explaining the start of his problems with Betfair, he said: "I got in touch with their customer service team to ask them to put up a tennis match involving Iga Swiatek. The agent who was dealing with me asked how I was.
"Flippantly, I said I was fine apart from having cancer. The next thing I knew was, when I tried to put up some bets on the World Darts Championship my account was suspended. Betfair then asked for a copy of my passport, a utility bill and a photo of my debit card, which I supplied within 20 minutes.
Joe Saumarez Smith: "It became clear that the backhand-only rule could potentially have caused difficulties for some riders" Joe Saumarez Smith: has chaired the BHA since 2022 "Despite producing all the forms they asked for, my account remained suspended while it was referred to the Safer Gambling Team. It was suspended for nine days, despite regular contact with the customer service team, asking when I could be reinstated. I was booked in for a check by the Betfair team on Thursday at 5pm, and they didn’t call me.
"It has been extremely frustrating, as Betfair is where I do most of my betting. I was one of a handful of people who went to their launch party in 2000, and I am told I was one of the first 50 external people to open an account. That does not seem to count for anything.
"It may explain why Betfair volumes on most sports are down over the past few years, if this is the sort of treatment many punters are facing, which, anecdotally, seems to be the case. You can imagine that a fair number of people just stop betting and find something else to do where they don’t face barriers or intrusive questioning all the time."
He said that his betting behaviours had not changed in the 18 months since his cancer diagnosis in June 2023 and that he very much doubted there were any 'markers of harm' on his account, given the Betfair account is several thousands of pounds in profit during that time.
His account was finally unsuspended on Sunday, shortly after Betfair was approached for comment by the Racing Post.
A Betfair spokesman said: “We hold ourselves to the highest standards and have specific controls in place to protect vulnerable customers, including those who tell us they are suffering from serious illness.
“We are urgently reviewing the circumstances in this case to determine what happened, but sincerely apologise for any inconvenience caused.”
Saumarez Smith's intervention comes a month after official statistics revealed a 20 per cent decline in betting turnover on racing over two years, a real-terms fall of £3 billion in the amount wagered each year.
Senior racing figures put the blame squarely on the Gambling Commission, described by Arena Racing Company's Martin Cruddace as "unaccountable and out of control", for pressuring bookmakers into imposing widespread checks on their customers.
Andrew Rhodes, chief executive of the Gambling Commission, responded by saying its actions were misunderstood and there were no affordability checks in place. That led to a claim from gambling analyst Regulus that the Commission is "gaslighting everybody".
Saumarez Smith continued: "I realise this is happening to tens of thousands of punters and I don’t expect any preferential treatment because of my position. But I hope by speaking out that people realise this is a real problem and not something mythical, which some of those who are helping shape the regulations seem to think is the case."
He added that two other major UK-facing bookmakers have recently restricted his accounts.
"Obviously, bookmakers have the right to decide who to take a bet from, but it seems harder than ever to maintain an unfactored account and all they want are customers who use high-margin products such as bet builders. I gather the traders think I am arbing, but I haven’t arbed in my life; I just want to be able to have a reasonable bet.
"I do think it is worth the Gambling Commission taking a closer look at why operators are restricting accounts. I know they always say it is a commercial decision for each company and they won’t get in the way of that, but it might be worth the GC looking at putting in some guidance on closing and restricting accounts as part of the conditions of licensing."
In common with all BHA employees, Saumarez Smith is not allowed to bet on horseracing. He says he bets mainly on lower league UK football games, darts, cricket and tennis, and that his normal stake is between £50 and £200. Before joining the BHA, he had a long history of betting on racing.
During his tenure as deputy political editor at the Daily Express, it was written into his contract that he would be off duty for the week of the Cheltenham Festival. He has spoken of turning over £50,000 per week in the early days of Betfair.
"Despite all the restrictions I have faced, I personally don’t believe operators should be forced to lay bets to everyone up to a certain limit, as happens in countries like Spain," concluded Saumarez Smith. "That would help roughly two per cent of punters at the expense of 98 per cent of bettors who currently enjoy bonuses such as price boosts, enhanced accumulator payouts and extra places.
"There are so many matched bettors who ruin the game for genuine punters, who get marked as ‘arbers’ even though all they are doing is shopping for the best price."
Welcome to the club! A bit late nevertheless welcome. It's the same old story. The bookies are blaming the Gambling Commission. And, the Gambling Commission is denying there is Affordability Checks (AC) in operation.
Additionally, some bookies are using AC to restrict betting accounts as a consequence too.
Welcome to the club! A bit late nevertheless welcome. It's the same old story. The bookies are blaming the Gambling Commission. And, the Gambling Commission is denying there is Affordability Checks (AC) in operation. Additionally, some bookies are us
GC fine the bookies for not checking up on customers but then deny checks are in place so has Andrew Rhodes explained how a betting company can find out important highly personal financial information about a customer without asking the customer to provide it?
GC fine the bookies for not checking up on customers but then deny checks are in place so has Andrew Rhodes explained how a betting company can find out important highly personal financial information about a customer without asking the customer to p
It seems that in this case it was his revealing that he had cancer that started the ball rolling against him, not defending the betting company but I'd imagine that to reveal that to a phone operator could be construed as a concerning thing to the operator and maybe lead the operator to question whether the customer is OK and raise the alarm?...maybe?
It seems that in this case it was his revealing that he had cancer that started the ball rolling against him, not defending the betting company but I'd imagine that to reveal that to a phone operator could be construed as a concerning thing to the op
you're giving a lot of benefit there , duffy to a company that when you have a disputed position on a long running market..say things like.."gosh, you have a lot of bets in this market.."
you're giving a lot of benefit there , duffy to a company that when you have a disputed position on a long running market..say things like.."gosh, you have a lot of bets in this market.."
if he's betting with the sportsbook..they don't need a reason..
if he's betting with the exchange in theory they would and would be more likely to be a deposit issue..but doesn't preclude intentional disruption/unfounded..
I'd have thought you (Rico) would fit the bill more than most..
if he's betting with the sportsbook..they don't need a reason..if he's betting with the exchange in theory they would and would be more likely to be a deposit issue..but doesn't preclude intentional disruption/unfounded..I'd have thought you (Rico) w
Probably the best thing that's happened to exchange is this incident.
Dont hold your breath........Black day for punters the day that Flutter acquired Betfair........its not in their interest for Betfair to florish.......BF is in terminal decline thay keep it on life support so they dont have to writedown what they paid for it....
i commend the article but hold little hope of any change
Probably the best thing that's happened to exchange is this incident.Dont hold your breath........Black day for punters the day that Flutter acquired Betfair........its not in their interest for Betfair to florish.......BF is in terminal decline thay
Joe Saumarez Smith is also said to be involved in the Rory Campbell story, as the investor who had tried to get his money out. Whether that is reliable or people mixing up two stories, who knows? Just in case, I'm going to back him in a treble to win Love Island.
Joe Saumarez Smith is also said to be involved in the Rory Campbell story, as the investor who had tried to get his money out. Whether that is reliable or people mixing up two stories, who knows? Just in case, I'm going to back him in a treble to win
What gets me is that he gave over his sensitive information without batting an eye to them and then telling the general public what information he had passed over, its as if hes acting normally and nothing will happen to the said data, deary me surely he would have done some research and found out what really happens and how safe it actually is, would it not be more informal to the general public highlighting the hazards of doing so?
What gets me is that he gave over his sensitive information without batting an eye to them and then telling the general public what information he had passed over, its as if hes acting normally and nothing will happen to the said data, deary me surel
It's time for an affordability check on the Gambling Commission.
Can we afford the cost of this lot? How much does it cost to run? What are the salaries of the
members of the Commission? May we view their bank accounts to find out what they spend their money
on?
It's time for an affordability check on the Gambling Commission. Can we afford the cost of this lot? How much does it cost to run? What are the salaries of the members of the Commission? May we view their bank accounts to find out what they spend
if he is involved in RORY scandal and didn't divulge it to betfair he shouldn't be given an account,if he did divulge it he should never be allowed with a million miles of any bookmaker
if he is involved in RORY scandal and didn't divulge it to betfairhe shouldn't be given an account,if he did divulge it he should never be allowed with a million miles of any bookmaker
if its the same bloke,the BHA that worried about losing revenue/black market bookies, their boss is betting in to unregulated Asian betting markets you couldn't make this stuff up, resignation watch
if its the same bloke,the BHA that worried about losing revenue/black market bookies, their boss is betting in to unregulated Asian betting markets you couldn't make this stuff up, resignation watch
It's time for an affordability check on the Gambling Commission.
Can we afford the cost of this lot? How much does it cost to run? What are the salaries of the
members of the Commission? May we view their bank accounts to find out what they spend their money
on?
BEST post for a long time, well said Rograin.
It's time for an affordability check on the Gambling Commission.Can we afford the cost of this lot? How much does it cost to run? What are the salaries of themembers of the Commission? May we view their bank accounts to find out what they spend th
TC confirms the chair of the BHA and an ITV racing presenter are involved in betting large sums in the black market,unregulated bookmakers in Asia,whilst telling us 24/7 about their worries for the UK Levy and finances
TC confirms the chair of the BHA and an ITV racing presenter are involved in betting large sums in the black market,unregulated bookmakers in Asia,whilst telling us 24/7 about their worries for the UK Levy and finances
Former MP fears for betting after 'ridiculous' gambling checks following loss of just £30 over three months
Former MP Laurence Robertson has labelled overzealous bookmaker intervention as “ridiculous” after revealing his own challenge with restrictions following a loss of just £30 over the course of three months.
Robertson, a Conservative MP for 27 years who served the constituency containing Cheltenham racecourse until losing his seat in the summer, frequently raised the issues of affordability checks and restrictions during his time in parliament, even taking the matter to the then prime minister Rishi Sunak in April.
getting fookin absurd -£30 notes over 12 weeks https://www.racingpost.com/news/gambling-review/former-mp-fears-for-betting-after-ridiculous-gambling-checks-following-loss-of-just-30-over-three-months-ay8J36s7NYPJ/
Former MP fears for betting after 'ridiculous' gambling checks following loss of just £30 over three monthsFormer MP Laurence Robertson has labelled overzealous bookmaker intervention as “ridiculous” after revealing his own challenge with restri
The MP lost £30 over 3 months. Thats why Bet365 tried to get rid of him by asking ridiculous questions and for affordability checks hoping he will go away. £30 for providing him with 3 months of 'entertainment'???. Which other business would put up with it?
The MP lost £30 over 3 months. Thats why Bet365 tried to get rid of him by asking ridiculous questions and for affordability checks hoping he will go away. £30 for providing him with 3 months of 'entertainment'???. Which other business would put up
A former GC member is the latest victim of AC. The irony was this was post winning £670. A moron (possibly on day-release) at 'billie' asked non-AC questions. That's what will happen if the bookies pay peanuts and get monkeys to determine and decide a punter's betting account and their fate.
A former GC member is the latest victim of AC. The irony was this was post winning £670. A moron (possibly on day-release) at 'billie' asked non-AC questions. That's what will happen if the bookies pay peanuts and get monkeys to determine and decide
This is what worries me most about this nonsense. It is only a part of what is happening in all financial sectors where very inexperienced people are able to see our financial records and even question us on them before giving them to scammers. The FSA is responsible for some of it with their ridiculous decision to scrap all older information (address, telephone number, passport number etc.) on people and insist on updated ones. It is all slowing down transactions of every sort and they wonder why there is no growth! In terms of betting I hope it is just what you suggest. I am afraid that it could be a carefully targeted way coming from top management to remove punters who might have an inside line and actually make a profit. If that is the case it has backfired as the GC and bookmakers are called out repeatedly for overstepping their authority.
This is what worries me most about this nonsense. It is only a part of what is happening in all financial sectors where very inexperienced people are able to see our financial records and even question us on them before giving them to scammers. The F
There is no established code of conduct with regards to AC eg unqualified and inexperienced individuals are allowed or doing the rounds. I firmly believe every AC by bookies the details of which must be recorded and sent back to the individual concerned for future reference, and safe keeping.
A police officer accessing private and sensitive info of certain individuals must "sign" in with an identifiable id to ensure no abuse or inappropriate/unauthorised access to the info. Why can't something similar be forced-upon any bookie personnel for AC? This will definitely increase accountability, governance and utmost trust which is severely lacking upon the user, and their employer.
And, any transgression outside the established code of conduct for AC will result in a mega fine, suspension from the betting/gaming industry and compensation for the AC victim.
There is no established code of conduct with regards to AC eg unqualified and inexperienced individuals are allowed or doing the rounds. I firmly believe every AC by bookies the details of which must be recorded and sent back to the individual concer
It is essential that if this is set to continue that only a selected group of trained and monitored staff should have access to bank details of clients. And this should apply to banks and insurance companies as well. There are already massive leaks in most organisations. Every time I have used Amazon in the last year (about 4 times) I have had a spam E mail within 12 hours asking for financial information clearly aimed at theft. I have stopped using them. There is no such thing as online security imo.
It is essential that if this is set to continue that only a selected group of trained and monitored staff should have access to bank details of clients. And this should apply to banks and insurance companies as well. There are already massive leaks i
Years ago I went for a mortgage and mortgage guy wanted to know all of my investments, and mrs's investments.
He then spent half an hour trying to sell us this that and the other before giving us OK for mortgage.
I reported him for miss selling, lol...
He had said best ever time to invest in Ftse, I guess he got told to lie even harder next time.
Years ago I went for a mortgage and mortgage guy wantedto know all of my investments, and mrs's investments.He then spent half an hour trying to sell us this that and the otherbefore giving us OK for mortgage.I reported him for miss selling, lol...He
I've had the same situation as Mr. Saumarez Smith. It was hell.
I've said this before I think, but I've been robbed at gunpoint and with a 6 inch kitchen knife twice (same person, same place). What I found most stressful were the Affordability Checks and Account Suspension. The robberies are over in 30 seconds, if you have any sense. The AC's go on and on. There is no sense and you are kept in the dark for ages. I'd liken to phoning up yiour bank and wanting to speak to a person. That's 30 minutes of listening to silly music and repeated messages. Affordability Checks are like expanding those 30 minutes to weeks. What makes it worse is that some self serving smug and condescending imbecile, thinks they know me better than I know myself. I'd rather visit the dentist 7 days a week.
I've had the same situation as Mr. Saumarez Smith. It was hell.I've said this before I think, but I've been robbed at gunpoint and with a 6 inch kitchen knife twice (same person, same place). What I found most stressful were the Affordability Chec
"Because we've decided it might be for your own good, and because we don't know why it might be for your own good, we are covering our own @rse by keeping you in the dark"
"Because we've decided it might be for your own good, and because we don't know why it might be for your own good, we are covering our own @rse by keeping you in the dark"
No genuine professional financial entity would conduct a due diligence similar to what the bookies are doing with AC - absolutely no one. Otherwise, 100% toast.
But, bookies are a law unto themselves; they rule the roost, and act as they please without impunity. Bookies pedal crack cocaine in fobt; they have no scruples. As such, their overzealousness in AC is not shocking to me. What is is their repeated lies about GC being the instigation of AC.
The bookies are manipulating AC to suit their agenda eg to promote slots and gaming to maximise profits, and damage horseracing to reduce levy.
No genuine professional financial entity would conduct a due diligence similar to what the bookies are doing with AC - absolutely no one. Otherwise, 100% toast. But, bookies are a law unto themselves; they rule the roost, and act as they please witho