• REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

    At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Affordability checks

Tanlic

Tanlic

Senior Jockey
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
12,108
Location
Bangkok Thailand
What's your opinion on these?

I can't believe the cheek of these people asking for bank statements.

or and Pay slips which are very personal and should remain private
 
The daft thing is that most of those who have a gambling problem will find a way to bet - that’s their problem. So you finish up not doing all that much about the problem you’re trying to address, but inconvenience and intrude on everyone else for no purpose whatsoever.
 
If I was required to proffer this information I would never bet again other than in the shops which would be rare.
 
The owner of todays winner of the Imperial Cup, Iceo, also affected by this.

https://www.racingpost.com/news/rep...-access-to-his-cheltenham-punts-aX3Gz2F12N24/

Sounds like he is being asked not because he is a problem gambler but because he actually won something worth having.

It used to be photocopy of a utitily bill, photo of last four digits on a bankcard, proof of address, and other security checks before you could make a substantial withdrawel, which happend to me a few times...now its bank statements.

Data and information collecting...it's the new oil for the world we now live.

There is nothing some people don't want to know.
 
Last edited:
That’s the bit I really don’t understand. How come you need these checks to get money out of your account? Sounds more like a device to enable bookies to renege on their payments than anything.
 
Sometime last year I put £100 with WH to make an AP bet for Cheltenham this year. I have been with them for more than 20 years and my initial application was signed by the then Chief Exec. of WH. I have had some decent bets, winners and losers with the firm, mostly AP . When I tried to make the bet it was rejected for not having completed security check. "Ok, I'll withdraw the £ 100" Response " Not until you supply statements and identification". For more than 2 decades my job was to put together funding for very large takeovers or support other banks doing the same. Later with friends I advised and sourced funds for medium sized companies often taking shares as part payment. Suffice to say I will not provide details that might enable a bookmaker to access my bank accounts. It"s simply risking too much.

Perversely there are several former senior money market traders that will take on sizeable bets for friends they know well on an informal basis but bets probably min £250. Whilst this can be helpful it doesn't work for smaller bets and I would think there may well be "back street" bookies starting to appear.
 
I believe - and I don't know all the ins and out, and there's plenty of questionable information bouncing around - that a significant-enough element of all this is the bookie's interpretation of documented 'guidelines' in tandem with trying to protect themselves from any potential fines.

Do I really think any bookie's action wrt affordability checks is about protecting punters? Do I bollocks. It's the same as anyone working in the corporate world (as an employee, parallel - punter) gets with their objectives and annual performance reviews. Lip service and pretence. Cos it has to be done. At a company level (parallel - bookie) they don't give a fu*k as long as anything can't harm them. It's only at a 'person' level that anyone cares, because there it's human care and emotion that might come to the fore (if it's allowed to).


So, at the higher figures, it may well be more about money-laundering (or more to the point, anything that could even within a furlong of the hint of money-laundering) rather than trying to protect a gambler from themselves.


This (appears to be what) explains what they've been 'advised' to 'consider'...

https://www.gamblingcommission.gov....me-act-2002/poca-part-2-4-risk-based-approach


********************************


At the normal 'me' level, yeah it's more about avoiding 'problem-gambling' related fines.

I think this is the most relevant page...

https://www.gamblingcommission.gov....-formal-guidance-for-premises-based-operators


*******************************************

In the case of Iceo's owner, you'd have to heavily suspect that the first of these, AML, was at the root of the actions taken by whichever book was involved.



PS I don't believe for one second that any of this would be used by a bookie (that any of us know, you know the names) to avoid paying out on a bet to a legitimate punter. It's just a tick-box exercise till they get clarity or someone official scraps the whole show.
 
Last edited:
Bet365 tonight- Went online to top up account and saw that they want you to provide all the info they request.

In order to see what you are required to provide you first have to agree to abide by their terms which includes agreeing to the stuff you haven't seen.
 

You may be requested to send some or all of the following documents:

A copy of photographic ID: This can be in the form of a copy of a Passport, Driver’s Licence or National ID card. Specifically it is the photograph page of the ID that we require for our verification checks. Please ensure that your name, photograph and signature are visible on the document
Credit/Debit Cards: A copy of the front and back of the credit/debit card(s) used to fund your account. Please ensure that all details are clearly legible to enable prompt and accurate verification. For security purposes, you should block the middle eight numbers on the front of the card and the 3 digit security code on the back of the card.
Proof of address: This may be submitted in the form of a utility bill or a credit card statement. It should be a recent document showing your full name and address as registered on your account with us. If you provide a credit card statement please ensure that you blank out the eight middle numbers of the credit card.
Other documentation: In exceptional cases, we may also request additional documents not included in the list above.
Notarised documentation: In exceptional cases, we may ask for your documents to be authenticated by an appropriate qualified Notary/Solicitor and signed and stamped as proof of legitimacy

It's easier to get a new passport than withdraw money from this lot
 
Last edited:
It was anew account for me and I got 4 figures coming from the from Constution Hill plus I have a double with them on CH and GDC at 20/1 to come. So I have no choice but give them what they ask for at the end of the week,,,,,,then I am closing the bloody thing.

I said I would stop backing heavily if Constitution Hill won so I am emptying all my accounts and leaving 100 quid in the Exchange....should be fun as the amounts are far from small.

My day of thinking I am JP McManus are over:lol:
 
Don't know how you far you'd fare from Thailand, but I'd try IBAS to resolve the unjustified intrusion.
 
edgt said:
Don't be so hasty Tanlic; there will be no punters left.
Click to expand...

Well it would appear there might be. After Constitution Hill won my friends who backed him ap were champing at the bit for another bet

I gave them Impaire Et Passe and Galopin Des Champs and 2 of the lads who won plenty off Constitution Hill have had a 10,000 baht (240 quid) doubles on.

If GDC wins I may have created 2 monsters :lol:
 
reet hard said:
Don't know how you far you'd fare from Thailand, but I'd try IBAS to resolve the unjustified intrusion.
Click to expand...

There's several involved and the ones who I upload funds into using an online wallet were no problem and the money was there withing a few hours including BF exchange.


Seems the Asian bookies are the worst because I used a card....but I will have everything by tomorrow they want. No sense in getting into a fight with them as it will give them an excuse to hold on longer.

As sson as GDC runs if there's more to come I will be closing all bar Betfair and one other who said they would guarantee me best oddds available despite the fact I don't reside in the uk.
 
Last edited:
Tanlic said:
There's several involved and the ones who I upload funds into using an online wallet were no problem and the money was there withing a few hours including BF exchange.


Seems the Asian bookies are the worst because I used a card....but I will have everything by tomorrow they want. No sense in getting into a fight with them as it will give them an excuse to hold on longer.

As sson as GDC runs if there's more to come I will be closing all bar Betfair and one other who said they would guarantee me best oddds available despite the fact I don't reside in the uk.
Click to expand...

BTW you talked me round and I had 30 quid on Enegymene in the end :0)
 
Last edited:
Now one bookmaker says because of amount concerned they want docs notarised as a measure against money laundering.

Never asked for that when they took my fckn bet........:mad: Nearest place I can get it done is 120km away
 
Last edited:
On Tuesday. had a bet in local Coral shop. Paid by card. Got slip/receipt .Winner - low 3 figures." Funds be in your bank a/c tomorrow"

Today still no credit to bank a/c.
So if I wanted to play in shop do I have to a stack of cash!
 
Don't get me started on this!

My most recent experience is Unibet requesting my documents at the beginning of March which begrudgingly I sent. They came back to me on the 6th March asking for more information which I also sent. The documents were all confirmed as accepted, but my account was still blocked for them to complete the checks.

I contacted them just before the Festival because I wanted access to my account for the most important four days of the year, and their customer service said that the team that do the affordability checks won't speak to me or do anything about it. They'll just take whatever time they take. He admitted that there customer service department are not allowed to contact them themselves and I just have to wait. I asked for it to be escalated, and he said there is no escalation, and nobody else would speak to me.

They state implicitly that their checks usually take 48 hours, but during busy periods is may take up to 5 days. Surely no problem at all to get this done before the Festival then? However they still haven't completed them today on the 22nd. They've now had almost 3 weeks to do this. All the documents are in order and would take literally 2 minutes to check. Essentially though, they're completely useless, with absolutely no customer service, and quite literally don't care about the damage to their reputation.

Despite not being able to use my account or see my bets, I am allowed to see my account balance (very kind of you Unibet!), which is very healthy post-Festival, so I'd be fairly sure their next move will be to can me completely. The sad thing is they are far from alone. Their behaviour is pretty much what I've come to expect from the bookmakers over the last few years. They are truly appalling. They treat any decent punter like dirt. They ask for information they have no right to have, and if you win they start by restricting your stakes, and then follow up by restricting you so heavily you can literally only get a few pence on. They don't actually cancel your account so their wonderful PR people can claim they have many more customers than they really do.

They whole thing is just way beyond a joke. There needs to be legislation that forces the industry to act like proper businesses, and not just makes their own rules up as they go along. they clearly can't be trusted, and aren't responsible enough to do so. Perhaps they should start by being forced to focus on the people who play the slots, who really are a danger to themselves.
 
Last edited:
Brutal that mate.

I had a “funny” experience just before Cheltenham, not quite an affordability check but I was bored one evening and came across a bookie called LiveScoreBet that were offering 2 x £10 Free Bets when staking your first £10 Bet. I had 10 minutes to kill so opened the account and backed Leyverkusen to win at 8/11 - they lost.

The 2 x £10 Free Bets were there soon after so I tried to throw a couple of haymakers at Cheltenham with them but they were both rejected due to stakes being too high. I gradually decreased the odds of my selections until I was trying to place one on an even money poke - but still the same messages. A couple of beers in and now with the bit between my teeth I contacted them via online chat, to be told my account had been restricted and I wouldn’t be able to use my free bets.

2 hours and one losing bet after opening it :blink:
 
wilsonl said:
Brutal that mate.

I had a “funny” experience just before Cheltenham, not quite an affordability check but I was bored one evening and came across a bookie called LiveScoreBet that were offering 2 x £10 Free Bets when staking your first £10 Bet. I had 10 minutes to kill so opened the account and backed Leyverkusen to win at 8/11 - they lost.

The 2 x £10 Free Bets were there soon after so I tried to throw a couple of haymakers at Cheltenham with them but they were both rejected due to stakes being too high. I gradually decreased the odds of my selections until I was trying to place one on an even money poke - but still the same messages. A couple of beers in and now with the bit between my teeth I contacted them via online chat, to be told my account had been restricted and I wouldn’t be able to use my free bets.

2 hours and one losing bet after opening it :blink:
Click to expand...

That needs reporting to someone/ somewhere.thats disgusting.
 
Hard to see bookies rowing back on these checks after the latest fines imposed by the Gambling Commission

The Gambling Commission has hit gambling operator Kindred Group with two penalties totalling more than £7.1 million for social responsibility and anti-money laundering (AML) failures involving two of its brands.

Platinum Gaming – which runs Unibet – will pay £2,937,599, and 32Red will pay £4,195,655 while both have also received an official warning following a commission investigation.

Among the failures identified by the industry regulator was that one 32Red customer was allowed to deposit £43,000 and lose £36,000 within seven days.

Customers were also able to register on Platinum Gaming after being blocked or self-excluded on the 32Red platform.

The commission also said that customer account reviews identified that financial triggers for AML reviews at 32Red were "too high and not appropriate to effectively manage money laundering and terrorist financing risks".

Gambling Commission executive director Kay Roberts said: "These failures highlight clearly that both operators failed to interact with customers in a way which minimises the risk of them experiencing harms associated with gambling.

"Our investigations also showed that policies and procedures were overlooked, both around customer accounts and anti-money laundering practices.

"Ultimately, it is an example which all gambling operators should take notice of to ensure they protect customers at all times."

Kindred said the investigation found fault with systems and processes in place in 2020 and early 2021 and claimed that similar cases would be "unlikely" to happen today following improvements to its operations.

Chief executive Henrik Tjarnstrom added: "While we accept the outcome, and the acknowledgment that we have already taken significant steps to strengthen our processes, we also recognise that we need to work even harder to ensure a safe and compliant business.

"We appreciate the commission’s clear recognition that our operations are in an improving position and that we remain fit to hold an operating licence."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Must admit that I have never really understood how money laundering works.

The sums of money being talked about here seem frightening to me, I'm still working my bets out in half crowns!
 

Recent Blog Posts

Back
Top