After almost a year of near-silence, the UK Gambling Commission has released new information on its controversial financial risk assessments, indicating it is inching closer to their possible introduction.
Plans to require operators to assess the financial wellbeing of high spending customers have been in a pilot programme since way back in August 2024.
This unprecedented length of time reflects the delicate nature with which the commission feels it needs to handle its divisive policy proposal.
According to a new update from Gambling Commission director of major policy projects and evaluation, Helen Rhodes, the regulator is “approaching the point” when it will send plans to its advisory board for approval.
However, she insists that no final decision has been made on whether to actually introduce them.
Frictional
In its current form, financial risk assessments would require UK-licensed operators to conduct a check when a customer passes into the top 3 percent of average gambling spending.
The checks will be conducted in partnership with credit reference agencies and give operators a view of that consumer’s financial wellbeing.
Armed with this data, responsible gambling teams then need to make a decision about whether to allow the player to continue gambling unimpeded or take whatever safer gambling actions they deem most sensible
The industry has been vocal about its fears of what would happen when these checks cannot be conducted automatically.
Gamblers, especially larger spenders, are unlikely to agree to voluntarily give up more information about their financial health and will instead move to the black market, they say.
The Gambling Commission insists that its pilot has shown that, of the 3 percent of customers that will trigger a check in the first place, 97 percent of them will have an assessment that is entirely frictionless.
That means that roughly 1 in 1,000 of all online customers will need some form of further interaction.
In her latest blog post, Rhodes also seeks to address operator concerns that the high-spending 3 percent that will trigger checks are at serious risk of fleeing offshore.
Rhodes argues that operators can best help these kinds of customers by intervening in ways that are “sustainable” and do not push them either to unmonitored land-based environments or the illegal market.
“It is really important that customers are supported rather than experiencing a knee-jerk reaction to a financial risk assessment by an operator defaulting to requesting documents (such as bank statements) or closing an account in every case,” she said.
There is still no timeline for the introduction of financial risk assessments or even a firm commitment that they will be introduced at all.
However the commission continues to strongly indicate that it will push forward with the plans, with Rhodes saying that it has developed plans with the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) to deliver “ongoing evaluation” of any new regulations.
No dice
Despite repeated assurances to the contrary, critics, including some of the UK gambling industry’s key representatives, insist that the checks are a form of affordability and, despite the commission’s latest assurances, are still calling for the project to be scrapped in its entirety.
“The Gambling Commission’s update underlines how important it is to openly evaluate whether any Financial Risk Assessments is genuinely workable or necessary given the huge changes brought in by regulation since 2023,” said Grainne Hurst, the chief executive of the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC).
Hurst told EEGaming that the evidence from the pilot shows that too many customers will face requests for extra documentation.
“If introduced as they stand, these checks will create unnecessary friction and risk driving customers towards the growing illegal black market, where there are no protections.
“Good regulation must be workable in practice; the pilot has shown these proposals don’t work and will be counterproductive to safeguarding people,” she said.
The commission has complained that scaremongering about the black market and its links to the pilot are overblown.
“Some coverage has suggested that consumers are currently being driven to use illegal operators as a result of financial risk assessments,” said Rhodes.
“This is despite the fact that the assessments are not live and not a single consumer has had any action taken based on one – even during the pilot”
The pilot is being conducted in a non-live environment with example customers drawn from real-world information.
