Cap gamblers’ monthly losses at £100, says watchdog
GAMBLERS’ losses could be capped at as little as £100 a month to force betting firms to combat addiction, under plans by the official industry watchdog.
The Gambling Commission is consulting over setting a threshold for losses which would trigger action and interventions by betting firms to ensure gamblers were not spending beyond their means.
The crackdown comes amid growing concern that gambling firms are failing to do enough to tackle the two million people in the UK who the commission estimates to be either problem gamblers or at risk of addiction.
The consultation, seen by The Daily Telegraph, found that more than half the population had a “discretionary” income of under £250 a month, after they had paid their taxes, bills, food and accommodation. The commission said any threshold needed to take account of the fact that this disposable income was not just for gambling but also for travel, sport, leisure, clothing, haircuts and other activities.
This was supported by data which showed that only 17 per cent of online slot gamblers and nine per cent of nonslot players suffered monthly reported losses of more than £100. This corresponded closely with the 21 per cent who admitted betting more than they could afford, which is regarded by experts as a key trait of problem gamblers, according to the commission.
It said that thresholds set by some companies at tens of thousands of pounds were not “appropriate” given the research. Citing a £2,000 limit as neither “realistic or appropriate,” it said the evidence pointed to a threshold “considerably below this”. “The lowest possible threshold is likely to be at least £100 loss per calendar month,” said the commission.
The plans are part of a major consultation into measures to protect vulnerable gamblers and those at risk of addiction, which includes time limits of an hour after which gamblers need to be challenged over their continued betting and curbs on bonuses. However, the most radical moves are likely to be on thresholds for spending which the commission acknowledged needed to balance “consumer freedom and privacy” with “consumer protection”.
In its consultation document, the commission criticised “inconsistent” approaches by gambling operators and said thresholds were “set too high”. “Some operators have revised their daily, weekly and monthly deposit thresholds down to levels still in the £10,000s,” said the commission. “Our compliance and enforcement teams have reviewed numerous cases where individuals have demonstrated gambling-related harms and yet have been able to continue to gamble without effective action being taken.”
The commission concluded that whatever evidence was submitted in the consultation, “we are clear that it is not now, nor will it be permitted in the future, for gambling operators to set thresholds for action at levels that are unrealistic, of the level which has been tackled in our enforcement activity”.