Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Gambling Commission Christmas party paid for.
https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/news/article/gbp825-000-fine-for-done-brothers-cash-betting-limited
https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/news/article/gbp825-000-fine-for-done-brothers-cash-betting-limited
Show More
£825,000 fine for Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited
03 December 2025
Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited, trading as Betfred, will pay £825,000 after a Commission investigation revealed social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
The operator, which runs a number of betting shops, will also receive a warning and have to undergo a third-party audit to ensure it is effectively implementing its anti-money laundering and safer gambling policies, procedures and controls.
Anti-money laundering failures included:
the licensee was unable to effectively identify and manage money laundering risks associated with customers using its B3 gaming machines. Whilst the licensee utilised machine alerts and daily reports, practices in place at the time of the assessment in 2024 meant the operator was unable to assess overall customer spend and the associated money laundering and terrorist financing risks
the licensee did not have an effective policy in place to identify and handle any customers who may be subject to financial sanctions
thresholds at which the operator made enquiries regarding customers’ source of income were not appropriately risk based, with thresholds set at £15,000 losses and at £125,000 stakes in 365 days.
Social responsibility failures included:
the licensee could not adequately identify spend and any associated financial indicators of gambling harm for customers using B3 gaming machines
customer interactions did not always take place following an identification of risk indicators, or when they did - interactions were not conducted in a way which minimised the risk of gambling related harm
the quality of interactions, in particular understanding the impact of the interaction, did not to meet the standards required.
This is the second time Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited has faced regulatory action – in 2023 the operator paid a £3.25 million regulatory settlement for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
John Pierce, Commission Director of Enforcement said: "While the failings identified during the 2024 Compliance Assessment were predominantly technical breaches rather than arising from specific customer examples, they were nevertheless unacceptable, particularly with thresholds appearing too high and insufficiently risk based when assessed in practice, and deficiencies in some processes and procedures adopted by the Licensee.
“We fully acknowledge the improvements the operator has already made since these issues were identified, and the independent audit will be key to confirming these changes are sustained so that the operator continues to be fully compliant with social responsibility and anti-money laundering requirements."
03 December 2025
Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited, trading as Betfred, will pay £825,000 after a Commission investigation revealed social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
The operator, which runs a number of betting shops, will also receive a warning and have to undergo a third-party audit to ensure it is effectively implementing its anti-money laundering and safer gambling policies, procedures and controls.
Anti-money laundering failures included:
the licensee was unable to effectively identify and manage money laundering risks associated with customers using its B3 gaming machines. Whilst the licensee utilised machine alerts and daily reports, practices in place at the time of the assessment in 2024 meant the operator was unable to assess overall customer spend and the associated money laundering and terrorist financing risks
the licensee did not have an effective policy in place to identify and handle any customers who may be subject to financial sanctions
thresholds at which the operator made enquiries regarding customers’ source of income were not appropriately risk based, with thresholds set at £15,000 losses and at £125,000 stakes in 365 days.
Social responsibility failures included:
the licensee could not adequately identify spend and any associated financial indicators of gambling harm for customers using B3 gaming machines
customer interactions did not always take place following an identification of risk indicators, or when they did - interactions were not conducted in a way which minimised the risk of gambling related harm
the quality of interactions, in particular understanding the impact of the interaction, did not to meet the standards required.
This is the second time Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited has faced regulatory action – in 2023 the operator paid a £3.25 million regulatory settlement for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
John Pierce, Commission Director of Enforcement said: "While the failings identified during the 2024 Compliance Assessment were predominantly technical breaches rather than arising from specific customer examples, they were nevertheless unacceptable, particularly with thresholds appearing too high and insufficiently risk based when assessed in practice, and deficiencies in some processes and procedures adopted by the Licensee.
“We fully acknowledge the improvements the operator has already made since these issues were identified, and the independent audit will be key to confirming these changes are sustained so that the operator continues to be fully compliant with social responsibility and anti-money laundering requirements."
Racing Post report
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/gambling-commission-hits-betfred-with-825000-fine-for-failings-related-to-gaming-machines-in-their-shops-ac6wn5x1JBOq/
Gambling Commission hits Betfred with £825,000 fine for failings related to gaming machines in their shops
Betfred have been hit with an £825,000 fine from the Gambling Commission for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
What were described as mainly "technical breaches" were associated with gaming machines in Betfred's betting shops, with the bookmaker saying no evidence had been found of any criminal spend.
Among their findings against Betfred, the commission said the operator was "unable to effectively identify and manage money laundering risks" associated with their gaming machines.
It also criticised Betfred for not adequately identifying spend and any associated financial indicators of gambling harm for customers and the quality of their customer interactions.
Betfred will also receive a warning and have to undergo a third-party audit.
The commission's director of enforcement John Pierce said: "While the failings identified during the 2024 compliance assessment were predominantly technical breaches rather than arising from specific customer examples, they were nevertheless unacceptable, particularly with thresholds appearing too high and insufficiently risk based when assessed in practice, and deficiencies in some processes and procedures adopted by the licensee.
"We fully acknowledge the improvements the operator has already made since these issues were identified, and the independent audit will be key to confirming these changes are sustained so that the operator continues to be fully compliant with social responsibility and anti-money laundering requirements."
It is the second time Betfred's betting shop estate has been the subject of regulatory action, with the firm having paid a £3.25 million settlement in 2023 for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
Responding to the latest punishment, Betfred's head of corporate affairs and communications Mark Pearson said: "Following a review of our UK-based betting shops by the Gambling Commission we have further strengthened our anti-money laundering and social responsibility policies.
"During the review, the commission found no evidence of criminal spend in our shops. Betfred is committed to ensuring a safe gambling experience for all our customers."
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/gambling-commission-hits-betfred-with-825000-fine-for-failings-related-to-gaming-machines-in-their-shops-ac6wn5x1JBOq/
Gambling Commission hits Betfred with £825,000 fine for failings related to gaming machines in their shops
Betfred have been hit with an £825,000 fine from the Gambling Commission for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
What were described as mainly "technical breaches" were associated with gaming machines in Betfred's betting shops, with the bookmaker saying no evidence had been found of any criminal spend.
Among their findings against Betfred, the commission said the operator was "unable to effectively identify and manage money laundering risks" associated with their gaming machines.
It also criticised Betfred for not adequately identifying spend and any associated financial indicators of gambling harm for customers and the quality of their customer interactions.
Betfred will also receive a warning and have to undergo a third-party audit.
The commission's director of enforcement John Pierce said: "While the failings identified during the 2024 compliance assessment were predominantly technical breaches rather than arising from specific customer examples, they were nevertheless unacceptable, particularly with thresholds appearing too high and insufficiently risk based when assessed in practice, and deficiencies in some processes and procedures adopted by the licensee.
"We fully acknowledge the improvements the operator has already made since these issues were identified, and the independent audit will be key to confirming these changes are sustained so that the operator continues to be fully compliant with social responsibility and anti-money laundering requirements."
It is the second time Betfred's betting shop estate has been the subject of regulatory action, with the firm having paid a £3.25 million settlement in 2023 for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures.
Responding to the latest punishment, Betfred's head of corporate affairs and communications Mark Pearson said: "Following a review of our UK-based betting shops by the Gambling Commission we have further strengthened our anti-money laundering and social responsibility policies.
"During the review, the commission found no evidence of criminal spend in our shops. Betfred is committed to ensuring a safe gambling experience for all our customers."
The mental picture of Fred and no breeches - has put me off my lunch 
Purely coincidence Fred saying he'd close all his shops prior to the budget
At least this seems to be about the 'machines' rather than a sports betting story for once.
walos
where do they get these fines? They are not laid down or have any precedent or legislation to guide. They are entirely arbitrary and based on nothing other than the colossal ignorance of the clueless d1ckheads at the stop gambling commission
Fred Dome should not be expected to act as a social worker
where do they get these fines? They are not laid down or have any precedent or legislation to guide. They are entirely arbitrary and based on nothing other than the colossal ignorance of the clueless d1ckheads at the stop gambling commission
Fred Dome should not be expected to act as a social worker
Dec 3, 2025 -- 3:25PM, Busyfool wrote:
waloswhere do they get these fines? They are not laid down or have any precedent or legislation to guide. They are entirely arbitrary and based on nothing other than the colossal ignorance of the clueless d1ckheads at the stop gambling commissionFred Dome should not be expected to act as a social worker
Totally agree
The Anti Gambling Commission will continue on their crusade until brought to book
Spot on mitolo - drug dealers and terrorists should be given a fair crack of the whip & have a god given right to have a bet.
I don't believe in the 2005 Gambling Act - terrorists just need to take more personal responsibility for their actions.
Give us an allergy you crashing bore
More irrelevant waffle from the forums greatest gobsh1te. Usual overblown garbage. You are incapable of making any sort of point without recourse to such bollox
More irrelevant waffle from the forums greatest gobsh1te. Usual overblown garbage. You are incapable of making any sort of point without recourse to such bollox
While we're at, I think we need to deregulate the banks. It's not like they're going to crash the world economy by recklessly gambling massive amounts of (other people's) money on junk bonds that they don't even understand. Is it?
And even if they did, surely all the ideologists that believe in free-markets would just be arguing that we should just let them fail. Wouldn't they? Surely the taxpayer wouldn't be asked to bail them out.
Maybe deregulate the Tobacco industry as well - it's not as if they're the sort of industry that would spend colossal amounts of money on advertising the health benefits of their products that turn out to be lethal. Is it?
Alcohol is pretty heavily (if not very effectively) regulated UTI.
And even if they did, surely all the ideologists that believe in free-markets would just be arguing that we should just let them fail. Wouldn't they? Surely the taxpayer wouldn't be asked to bail them out.
Maybe deregulate the Tobacco industry as well - it's not as if they're the sort of industry that would spend colossal amounts of money on advertising the health benefits of their products that turn out to be lethal. Is it?
Alcohol is pretty heavily (if not very effectively) regulated UTI.
We could abolish some more building regs - take a gamble on whether Fred would find the price of asbestos too good to resist.
And you go and prove it with more of the same irrelevant waffle. You simply cannot stick to the point or form any sort of cogent argument or have a discussion
Always wildly overblown waffle like 'tobacco' and 'abolishing building regs', as if its in any way a suitable comparison. It isnt. It is total bollox
Infantile non-arguments from the forums greatest bore
Always wildly overblown waffle like 'tobacco' and 'abolishing building regs', as if its in any way a suitable comparison. It isnt. It is total bollox
Infantile non-arguments from the forums greatest bore
Aye, left to his own devices, Fred and his like would have done the right thing - and made a massively positive contribution to society.
He's probably particularly proud of the time when he promoted his Pay-day loan scheme to his own staff.
He's probably particularly proud of the time when he promoted his Pay-day loan scheme to his own staff.
What's that you say, some of my people are struggling on the pittance I pay them?
Instinct kicks in - and he wonders how he can capitalise on that. Good man.
Instinct kicks in - and he wonders how he can capitalise on that. Good man.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Avoiding the point as ever
And talking to yourself
Avoiding the point as ever
And talking to yourself
Bookies happy with their 5%,10% of drug monets being
laundered through their machines.
Poor drug dealers cannot launder the monets more quickly
by punting on hosses like wot they used to do.
laundered through their machines.
Poor drug dealers cannot launder the monets more quickly
by punting on hosses like wot they used to do.
Government want 40% of online profits from
druggies laundering in casino mode, lol.
druggies laundering in casino mode, lol.
iTS a myth about fobts being laundries
Almost every user is a casual or mug. The limits are tiny and youd have to spend 10 hours on them. They simply dont, and a Hills area manager told me this only 2 weeks ago. Maybe hes wrong but I will take his word until I hear better
Its a tax on gross profits and misleading to suggest any bookmaker will be keeping anything like the difference. It will make them barely profitable and smaller firms wil go, others will 'consoildate', ie be swallowed by a bigger rival and punters will pay for it with increased margins
Almost every user is a casual or mug. The limits are tiny and youd have to spend 10 hours on them. They simply dont, and a Hills area manager told me this only 2 weeks ago. Maybe hes wrong but I will take his word until I hear better
Its a tax on gross profits and misleading to suggest any bookmaker will be keeping anything like the difference. It will make them barely profitable and smaller firms wil go, others will 'consoildate', ie be swallowed by a bigger rival and punters will pay for it with increased margins
They certainly were "laundries" a few years back,Busy.
Busyfool03 Dec 25 16:31Joined: 14 Oct 25 | Topic/replies: 369 | Blogger: Busyfool's blog
Avoiding the point as ever
I think I've explained why civilised countries have regulations and protections for their citizens.
If you don't like it fk off and live in Russia or some Third World Banana Republic. Live in an asbestos house or a house with no foundations, eat food that's full of addictive toxins, drink water that contains harmful chemicals, drive without a seat belt, put your money in a bank that might go bust, bet with the local mafia and drink alcohol laced with ethanol. Enjoy.
Avoiding the point as ever
I think I've explained why civilised countries have regulations and protections for their citizens.
If you don't like it fk off and live in Russia or some Third World Banana Republic. Live in an asbestos house or a house with no foundations, eat food that's full of addictive toxins, drink water that contains harmful chemicals, drive without a seat belt, put your money in a bank that might go bust, bet with the local mafia and drink alcohol laced with ethanol. Enjoy.
no you havent. Youve waffled on with absurd abandon. Equating gambling law and enforecement with asbestos yet another example of an allergy that doesnt fit
Russia a tad unlikely. Third world banana republics(they never are) supply us with streams of illegal immigrants you are in favour of letting in
Russia a tad unlikely. Third world banana republics(they never are) supply us with streams of illegal immigrants you are in favour of letting in
They may well have been Iron. Thats not what I said though is it?
Busyfool03 Dec 25 17:49Joined: 14 Oct 25 | Topic/replies: 372 | Blogger: Busyfool's blog
illegal immigrants you are in favour of letting in
^ wtf have you got that from???? You really are a stupid old lush.
Just because I think Farage is a shallow, one-dimensional, self-seeking, self-promoting, con-artist, that would be disastrous for the country, doesn't make me an advocate for illegal immigration. I still hold out hope that some sane people will intervene and deal with it without trashing the country.
illegal immigrants you are in favour of letting in
^ wtf have you got that from???? You really are a stupid old lush.
Just because I think Farage is a shallow, one-dimensional, self-seeking, self-promoting, con-artist, that would be disastrous for the country, doesn't make me an advocate for illegal immigration. I still hold out hope that some sane people will intervene and deal with it without trashing the country.
lush indeed. Prefrable to a bore even if true
never mentined Garage. You did to change the direction
Unless I am mistaken you have argued in favour and I suppose now I will have to have a look at your previous bollox. Dismal prospect
You have argued in favour of immigration and poke fun at Aceform for his views on immigrants
Do you believe immigration from the middle east and Africa is a good thing and of benefit to the UK?
never mentined Garage. You did to change the direction
Unless I am mistaken you have argued in favour and I suppose now I will have to have a look at your previous bollox. Dismal prospect
You have argued in favour of immigration and poke fun at Aceform for his views on immigrants
Do you believe immigration from the middle east and Africa is a good thing and of benefit to the UK?
TM obviously prefers our Country to be continuously flooded by the "Boat Ponces" to an alternative
Yeah, that's what's happened here.
You've wanted a discussion about regulation - and I've deflected it onto illegal immigration.
I poke fun at Aceform, because he is a nasty little bigot with the vocabulary of a 6yo and an intellect to match - yet he still thinks we want to hear about his dismal "selections". fodder, tbf, ffs.
You've wanted a discussion about regulation - and I've deflected it onto illegal immigration.
I poke fun at Aceform, because he is a nasty little bigot with the vocabulary of a 6yo and an intellect to match - yet he still thinks we want to hear about his dismal "selections". fodder, tbf, ffs.
UTI - Credit where it's due, yer man has got some ideas on illegal immigration. Further credit for bringing that into the consciousness of main stream politicians, who really, really didn't seem to get it.
Do I like that he's done that? Yes. Do I like how he's done it? No.
Is he the leader of a protest group that you would most like on the side of your cause if you were a protestor? Absolutely.
Would he make a good Prime Minister - Don't make me laugh!
Do I like that he's done that? Yes. Do I like how he's done it? No.
Is he the leader of a protest group that you would most like on the side of your cause if you were a protestor? Absolutely.
Would he make a good Prime Minister - Don't make me laugh!
Now, does anyone want to get back to discussing what Fred and his ilk might have got up to if there were no regulations?
In the context of what he actually has got up to under a hopeless regulator the most light touch of regulations.
In the context of what he actually has got up to under a hopeless regulator the most light touch of regulations.
The Management 03 Dec 25 18:10
Yeah, that's what's happened here.
You've wanted a discussion about regulation - and I've deflected it onto illegal immigration. BlushLaugh
I poke fun at Aceform, because he is a nasty little bigot with the vocabulary of a 6yo and an intellect to match - yet he still thinks we want to hear about his dismal "selections". fodder, tbf, ffs
Lol, nice one Albert, you conference room bore…..ffs….
Yeah, that's what's happened here.
You've wanted a discussion about regulation - and I've deflected it onto illegal immigration. BlushLaugh
I poke fun at Aceform, because he is a nasty little bigot with the vocabulary of a 6yo and an intellect to match - yet he still thinks we want to hear about his dismal "selections". fodder, tbf, ffs
Lol, nice one Albert, you conference room bore…..ffs….
The only mystery to me is how anybody gets a bet on of any significance with the bald manc
Bookies never learn. They do not care about the gambling harm for customers and regularly abuse the social responsibility and anti-money laundering pertaining to the terms and conditions of their license to trade. They were fined £3.25m in 2023 for the same offences.
I think Betfred should have been fined £6.5m (at least) for a similar offence so soon after the last one.
I think Betfred should have been fined £6.5m (at least) for a similar offence so soon after the last one.
Pretty sure Acey would have no trouble getting on UTI.
Losers welcome, machine players welcome, addicts welcome. That's the business model.
It's pretty much why I can't understand people on here defending him or attacking the regulator - it's losers only welcome - so maybe that does explain it?
Losers welcome, machine players welcome, addicts welcome. That's the business model.
It's pretty much why I can't understand people on here defending him or attacking the regulator - it's losers only welcome - so maybe that does explain it?
Never played showground material since I lost 4 old pennies playing roll a penny….ffs
I leave flashing lights and silly noises to the silly people tbh….
I leave flashing lights and silly noises to the silly people tbh….
I don't think he is a bigot. But his use of language is inelegant, to put it mildly
But he is broadly correct and you are in denial
As for regulation, your hysteria is a distraction. Im not suggesting it is removeed, just how it is implemented and explained-it isnt. No questions asked of the gc to justifiy their arbritrary decisions
They are their own judge and I would sack all of them and I dealt with them for 10 years. Useless and stupid all of them
Bookmakers meekly pay up for fear of something worse. Constantly questioning their customers and demanding personal info has been a calamity all round and its unreasonable to expect them to act as financial policemen
But he is broadly correct and you are in denial
As for regulation, your hysteria is a distraction. Im not suggesting it is removeed, just how it is implemented and explained-it isnt. No questions asked of the gc to justifiy their arbritrary decisions
They are their own judge and I would sack all of them and I dealt with them for 10 years. Useless and stupid all of them
Bookmakers meekly pay up for fear of something worse. Constantly questioning their customers and demanding personal info has been a calamity all round and its unreasonable to expect them to act as financial policemen
The only mystery to me is how anybody gets a bet on of any significance with the bald manc
Common theme with the High Street bookies.Have a winning bet and you're turfed out or asked all sorts of questions.
Stand by one of the crack-cocaine spinners for an hour or three, pump it with a few thousand pound and no questions asked.
Ant-money laundering laws are there for a reason so why should Baldy fo0ker ignore them at will.
Likewise, hopeless gamblers much like Hopeless alcoholics (I see the resident alky Mitolo is on 'ere) need to be helped.
Common theme with the High Street bookies.Have a winning bet and you're turfed out or asked all sorts of questions.
Stand by one of the crack-cocaine spinners for an hour or three, pump it with a few thousand pound and no questions asked.
Ant-money laundering laws are there for a reason so why should Baldy fo0ker ignore them at will.
Likewise, hopeless gamblers much like Hopeless alcoholics (I see the resident alky Mitolo is on 'ere) need to be helped.
I can be polite in person busyfool…..well mannered tbh….but this is a keyboard riddled with all kinds tbf
Mitolo(Busy with his tool) is rarely well-mannered Formy.
Hence he gets banned from time to time often following some fashion of a drunken outburst against anonymous forumites.
Hence he gets banned from time to time often following some fashion of a drunken outburst against anonymous forumites.
Aceform would be welcomed in any Bookmakers.
As a consistent loser you would Lay his bets blindfolded
As a consistent loser you would Lay his bets blindfolded
Quixall has had time out to train his new pet wildebeest which he has named Hawkeye aka Hawkeye the Gnu, training in the river Tay for white water Gnuing!!
Carbine Harvester
I wouldn’t be laying this one tbh…..
Would be no surprise to see this win comfortably.
I wouldn’t be laying this one tbh…..
Would be no surprise to see this win comfortably.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539