Dire experiences of affordability checks show balanced solution is needed soon

Gambling minister Paul Scully is reportedly considering throwing his hat into the ring to become the Conservative Party candidate in London's mayoral election next year – but he has a fair bit of work to get through before then.

One of the many tasks in his in-tray is the publication of the government's gambling review white paper, which is due to happen "in the coming weeks" according to an answer made by Scully on Monday to a written question about "trends in the level of gambling shops on high streets in London".

As regular readers will no doubt be aware, the gambling review was launched in December 2020 and the white paper has been due to be published "in the coming weeks" for the best part of a year but has been repeatedly delayed.

However, the indications are the gambling industry – and other interested parties including British racing – will see how the government plans to reform the sector soon.

One of the reasons for the latest delays to the white paper's publication is understood to be the knotty problem of affordability checks to establish whether a customer can afford their level of gambling and how to ensure the vulnerable are protected while the vast majority can pursue their pastime unhindered.

The issue, as has been illustrated in the pages of the Racing Post in recent weeks, is that in the absence of the white paper and any clear guidance from the Gambling Commission, operators have brought in their own checks which often ask intrusive questions about punters' financial affairs.

Scully has described himself as a libertarian and a flavour of his thinking was demonstrated in a refreshingly frank discussion he had on Twitter on January 7 this year. The minister was told by another Twitter user that to raise the limit on their account they had been asked to provide information such as three months of bank statements and a P60.

Scully replied: "Think we can do better than that. Bear with me for the next few weeks and I hope you'll be okey with what we publish. It's only one stage on the journey as a white paper is not legislation. Hopefully we won't need much formal legislation anyway."

His correspondent complained again about bookmakers asking for "intrusive documentation", to which Scully replied: "That's what I meant about proportionate. We should have a less invasive solution for that soon which better addresses risk of harm without being prescriptive about how much of your own money you can gamble."

Paul Scully: minister's libertarian tendencies a cause for optimism regarding affordability checks

As readers of the Racing Post have demonstrated when asked to describe their experience of the checks they have undergone both for affordability and source of funds, a less "invasive solution" cannot come soon enough.

A theme that was often repeated was the bewilderment of people who had happily gambled without any issues for decades only to find they now had to produce financial details such as bank statements and then go into detail about various transactions.

There were a number of cases of retired businessmen finding themselves limited because they did not receive a salary, despite showing they were asset-rich.

Even those who provided the financial information being asked of them complained of finding themselves in limbo for weeks, with their betting accounts frozen while bookmaker compliance departments dealt with their cases.

That was not the case with everyone. One punter who contacted the Racing Post said they had been impressed with the way their case had been dealt with by bet365.

However, there were a number of examples where customers had been deeply unimpressed with the way they had been treated, often by major firms. And if the compliance teams at major firms are struggling to deal with their workload, how can smaller operators cope? It will surely be a barrier to entry into the industry and result in further consolidation.

There is obviously scope for improvement in the way operators deal with such checks, but the pressure is coming from the Gambling Commission.

British racing's leadership has tried to make its case to the industry regulator that it is suffering collateral damage as a result of affordability checks, to the tune of £40 million according to one estimate.

The problem is the Gambling Commission is likely to take some convincing its actions are impacting the sport and, in any case, British racing's issues are not among the regulator's concerns.

Given the criticism it has received in recent years – words such as "torpid", "outgunned" and "not fit for purpose" have been used to describe it – the commission has in recent years stepped up its requirements of operators and the sanctions should they fail to meet the regulator's standards.

Scully's comments that there are better and less invasive ways to deal with the issue of affordability checks will be welcomed by the betting and racing industries alike. However, if, as is expected, any proposals about the checks go to consultation, then the fear is that there will be no lessening of the pressure on operators to continue implementing the same checks as now.

Scully said in another Twitter exchange that he was "trying to get the balance right so those who enjoy gambling without issues can do so, the industry can prosper in a responsible way and we can pick up on those most at risk at an early stage".

It has to be hoped he can achieve his wish.

Have you been affected by intrusive affordability checks? If so, we would like to hear from you. Email us (editor@racingpost.com) with the subject 'Affordability checks' to share your experiences and contact details

Read more . . .

'Not fit for purpose' – prominent MP slams gambling regulator over interventions

'Enough is enough' – punters detail their frustration with intrusive checks

Punters' views: 'Nobody checks my records when I buy wine or fill my car up'

Download the new Racing Post app here to read exclusive content from the biggest names. There are brilliant betting masterclasses from Tom Segal, Paul Kealy and David Jennings, Q&As with pro punters, trainers and jockeys, plus much more. Download the new app now to access all of this unrivalled content.