sorry richgit, I sort of nicked your joke there

Surely the answer is to change banks rather than be subjected to abuse ? And tell them why you're taking your business elsewhere .

A little bonus is it always used to be the case that when a customer closed an account they have to explain to their branch manager why it's been closed, so the reason will be reported and logged.

The point is (as you well know mitolo) - that plenty of people have had their betting accounts restricted or closed -  nobody on this thread has had their bank account closed.

Some people have been sent an inconsequential (easily deleted) e-mail - and they seem to be outraged.

I appreciate that it's currently very trendy to be outraged but given all of the current issues around betting are a direct result of (so-called) bookmakers behaviour - I was merely suggesting that the outraged people might want to redirect their outrage to the people that have behaved outrageously. Which is not (on this occasion) the banks.

Do the big bookies get emails from their bank every time they pay out, suggesting that they might want to ban the winning punter?

The knight

Pretty sure they will offer compensation as you taking grievance to
ombudsman costs them £500,and costs you only your time.

Then there is the possibility everybody does it...

They may say they are obliged to send email, but you simply counter
with it being a blanket email that should not be sent to you, and
has caused huge distress as you may have to rearrange your banking
facilities due to them not knowing their customers.

It's how it starts though management.
Test the waters.
Send an email, see how our authoritarianism comes across?
Why is spending money on gambling even worth bringing up by a financial institution if it is legal?
There's an agenda and small steps to begin with is how they get enacted, imo
Trust no-one especially banks.

Power to the people!

If you want to blame somebody or get outraged, theres only really two options - either the (so-called) bookmakers or the (so called) regulators (GC).

The bookmakers ignored the regulations for 20 years - The regulator allowed them to do so.

Anything else (including blaming banks) is a complete distraction. And a lot of people on this thread seem to have been suckered into focussing on the distraction.

ffs.....

Can't blame bookies for bank emails, nor banks for bookies closing accounts.

You can only blame them for their own actions and how they are applied to you.

The fact that ombudsman charge banks per case means banks have to treat their
customers fairly, or risk paying £500 a pop.

Don't agree. The banks asking you for explanations of your spend is obviously driven by the government and so is all the bookies malarky.
They are trying to foster a culture of knowing where every penny of the people's  money goes and how they can monitor and decide how you act.
The emails are the beginning.

What do you think the Bank is implying when talking about how you spend your money on gambling they consider too much?
It's a softly softly approach to you the money holder, explaining yourself.
Further on down the line there will be more questions on why you have bought this and that etc
I'm simply saying at least take your cash out in a "free" market and put the money into a bank that minds its own business. It's easy to do.
At least show a level of intolerance to being pushed around that will at least give these **** the vague notion we have a backbone.
Be fierce and nip it in the bud now, before we all sleepwalk into "whatever you say" territory.
The gambling part is a nothing burger, its a small fact finders mission to see if sheep will do as they are told and guage how resistant people are.
There's no outrage. Treat it as a smack on the fingers of a naughty child/bank who gets too interfering.

Agree with all that TM, I just feel the link in the chain of rights erosion is past the bookies and now we get to the serious boys like banks and try to stop or stall it there.

It's entirely the same point - it's a natural follow on to the situation the on-line bookmakers have engineered over the past 20+ years.

If you can still place a bet with a (so-called) on-line bookmaker* - then imo your bank (in the vast majority of cases) probably aren't far wrong to profile you as, best case scenario a losing gambler (in the long-term) or worst case scenario, a degenerate addict. Nobody else outside of those two groups is allowed to bet.

* Denises mob being (to my knowledge) the only possible exception - as unlike all of the rest, they will continue to service a winning account for more than a nano-second before making a decision to restrict or close your account.

Fair enough if you are a leisure loser - happy to pay (through losses) in exchange for the entertainment you receive - but that doesn't alter the fact that in essence - if you can still deposit with a (so-called) on-line bookmaker - your bank isn't gonna be far wrong in assuming you must be must losing.

If you're a loser (or even a winner) - I can't see what offence could be caused by your bank pointing out some information that is available to you. I'd take more offence at the (so-called) bookmakers that have closed or restricted my accounts very quickly - still constantly e-mailing me with "special offers" that they know I am ineligible for - but I still receive such e-mails every single day!

I take even more offence when in order to withdraw money from any of those (so-called) bookmakers, I have had to go through the massively inconvenient process of them pretending they think I am a money launderer or a terrorist and also pretending that the govt or the GC are forcing them to do that.

You deposit £30 and turn it into £500 you are treated like a terrorist. You deposit £500 and lose it, you are treated like a VIP!

Anything that is happening now (including inconsequential information e-mails from banks) is a direct result of how bookmakers have behaved. If you want to focus on the inconsequential e-mail from your bank, rather than the real issue - that is your choice. Go ahead - but it's a classic case of "shooting the messenger"*

*Shooting the messenger" (also "killing the messenger" or "attacking the messenger" or "blaming the bearer of bad tidings / the doom monger") is a metaphoric phrase used to describe the act of blaming the bearer of bad news, despite the bearer or messenger having no direct responsibility for the bad news.

There are lots of contributing factors of why we got to where we are today.  Of course there is a strong ring of truth to what you say and the bookies targetting addicts and big losers is probably the biggest factor.  But it doesn't help going forward.  Regulation is a snowball.  It increases bookies costs, it reduces bookies revenue, which in turn leads to worse prices, less options, restricting and closing of successful accounts.  Punters who remain win less and lose more and punters who are addicts may well switch to the black market. 

The Santander email in itself is pretty tame (imo) but it's the first of it's kind, it's more snow on the snowball attacking gambling.  It could be the pre cursor for worse.  It's self righteous, ignorant, condescending and controlling and is not in anyone interest's save an extremely tiny minority.

It's regulations and attitudes towards gambling that kills and I want to give an example.  I bet a little on a Dutch Fantasy betting site called Zweeler.  The stakes per entry are typically £4 to £10 and you are limited to typically 5-10 entries.  Each entry has to differ by a certain number of runners and 80% of players only have one entry.  So it's very much a fun thing where you can't win a serious amount and it's very difficult to lose a lot.  About 15 months ago, they had to pull out of the Dutch market, taking away 50% of their client base, because the Dutch government insisted on a different type of licence which was far more expensive.  This company has a model that couldn't be any more affordability and casual punter friendly (BY FAR) than anyone other betting company I know.  But the cost of regulation makes that almost impossible.

By ratcheting up regulatory costs and fines, you make achieving punter affordability more difficult.  Regulation is the biggest killer to gambling.  It always was and it always will be

any email if you buy half a dozen of these for your gamesroom ? 

https://www.pinball.co.uk/spares-accessories/?yith_wcan=1&product_cat=pinball-machines-for-sale

No they haven't been gambling machines for a very long time. It's just an example of how you could spend a lot of money on "toys" and have next to no chance of profit.  Put 15k on a horse and it may win.

OK, an update from my email of 2 days ago. but first, a word for the odd one or two who have argued about this and feel my 'moaning' is being an old 'g*t'. Also, the same word applies to the poster who thinks this is an email from Santander that can be 'easily deleted'. Yes, of course it can but it is the thin edge of the wedge - where will the banks go next?

It isn't moaning either. The young and foolish on this site (and, sadly, there are plenty of both groups) do not yet realise that life in the UK is starting to become unbearable for people like me - a white, intelligent, well off (through his own efforts), respectable, 'straight' male. I do nobody any harm and yet face all kinds of restrictions that are not needed.

If the UK carries on like this, we will see future generations growing up accepting this meddling in their lives as their norm. They will not know what it is like to life with the freedom to do what you want providing you consider others and are inside the law.

Sorry, but bugg*r anyone that gets in gambling trouble - let them learn the hard way like I did a long, long time ago. Nothing is as good a teacher as hard knocks in life and trying to shield people from that is going to make our society full of 'snowflakes' who have their hand out for help all the time.

OK, rant over.

Right, I spoke to the Santander Select team (I am 'Select' customer) today and they were openly shocked at this email. My complaint has gone to the complaints team who will contact me shortly to discuss. What those on here who have decried my action do not realise is that I want to know if Santander have set this email up via auto-analysis software or through a team of people 'snooping' through my account transactions - which is totally unacceptable. (I suspect it is a crude bit of automated software, BTW.)

If a bank really must try to second guess the government and become 'oh so rightous' then let them do it with some common sense and proper analysis - not just blanket emails which capture those like me who need their 'advice and guidance' the very least!

I predict a long battle over this but I want to know the following:

1/ Have they snooped my account? 2/ What scale are they using to consider if someone has a high level of gambling activity. 3/ Have they ever heard of arbitrage? 4/ Will the same zealous interfering run to those who have paid a lot of cash out to wine companies, or restaurants etc. 5/ Why do they keep lending money to those who cannot afford it and thus encouraging feckless behaviour, whilst bothering themselves about what I am doing?

In the end, after first receiving a lot of 'woke inspired' replies from them, I do still predict they will apologize for the blanket approach over these emails but not for the content.

I will keep all posted as this progresses.

I wouldn't disagree with much of that The Knight - I was just pointing out the origin of your "problem" is not a bank - and that is a fact.

Also, you can't have it both ways imo. You want to speak out or take action about an issue that is clearly important to you but you want to dismiss and name-call people doing the same about issues that they see as important to them. The credit you get for the former is wiped out by the latter imo.

"Nothing is as good a teacher as hard knocks"

That reminded me of one of my favourite quotes .... "Good judgement comes from experience and experience comes from bad judgement"