Social responsibility of gambling sites

there's an interesting article on the bbc website following a fine for one of the larger companies and I would hope this leads to better systems in future.

I have previously complained, not really getting anywhere and now want to put any energy into my ongoing recovery.

It does make me sick and frustrated when I think about it all but ultimately I wouldn't want to go to court over it all and think that is what it is going to take to really make a difference.

Given the ppi and payday loan redress thats happening, I could see something in future but whilst I still have mountains of debt, Im using the repayment time to try and work on my addiction whilst taking satisfaction from knowing that they no longer get my money!

Hi problems166,

Unfortunately I know quite a lot about this and the social responsibilty code as set out by the Gambling Commission. You will find that every 'bookie' takes a different view of the code and in 99% of cases will exploit the system to make sure it works for them, i.e. to maximise profits. As long as they can point you in the direction of some shady T&C's then the GC or any dispute resolution service are unlikely to stick with whatever decision they make.

With me, I self exlcluded from pretty much every online bookmaker I could find but often re-registered for a lot of these sites and slightly altered my details to do so. In reality, you have to do this if you want to re-register as if you use the same email address, it will stop you registering in the first place. This for me instantly highlights that these firms a) don't understand addiction and b) don't want to help problem gamblers, as lets face it a compulsive gambler will do almost anything to place a bet when they are in the mood so using a different email address is not going to stop them!!

Some companies, ones I hold with slightly more respect, will within minutes of opening a new account find matches of your name and DOB for anyone who has previously self-excluded and immediately restrict your accounts. This may cause issues for anyone who happens to have the same NAME and DOB as a self-excluded gamber but surely this is the safe way to operate? It's also proof that this can and should be done by ALL online firms but the majority will do the following;

a) if you're losing, they'll let you keep losing..

OR

b) if you win and attempt to withdraw your money, they'll soon say.. 'you are banned form our site, you can't have this money'.

Unfortunately I've seen every which way this can work. With one company, I opened a new account and was allowed to use the site for 2 weeks.. at the end of my binge I attempted to withdraw around £2000. About 24 hours later my account was suspended and I was told you due to a previous self exclusion all I would get back was £400 (my total deposits).

With another company (B*****d - am I allowed to name and shame??) I lost £1500 within 30 minutes of opening a new account (yes - I used slightly different details, as above I'm an addict and this is what you do!). Did they contact me and say, you shouldn't be using our site and here's your deposits back? Don't be daft. They took every single penny and said it was my responsbility to update them with any new addresses and email addresses so that they couldn maintain the self-exclusion.

With another firm, I opened a new account placed a £50 bet (it won and returned me £550) but within 2 hours I had an email saying I had blocked myself from another firm (who operated under the same license) and as such this self exclusion was applicable across ALL their brands and I would get me £50 deposit back but not the winnings.

To be brutally honest, this is all my fault and as businesses I can see why each one of these companies did what they did. To maximise profit!! What hurts me is that they are exploiting addiction and illness when clearly they can do more to stop people like me being able to use their sites.

If you need more information, I'm happy to help but to be frank you should use the above examples as motiviation to quit. Forget about the money and see it as the last time you ever give them a penny..

Hi there P666.

I thinkk youv'e had acouple of good reply's in the above two post's , the gambling companies don't really care that you or I are addict's and as has been said it's all about profit for them , they may act all responsible but will alway's use the excuse " That the onus is on you not to try and gain fraudulent access to thier sites once youve self excluded , which as we all know is unfortunately true .

Personally as others have said , I wouldn't trouble yoursef with the " How is this fair " thought's and just let it go , walk away and get on with your life but this time gamble free :)).

I wish you well my friend

I was listening to a radio show on the BBC about this a few weeks back, and they had an ex-compulsive gambler on the show who believed that gambling sites should be made to conduct affordability style checks on those who sign up. It got me thinking about how surely there must be a more easier way to easily identify a person to be a problem gambler?

If the Gambling Commisson could develop some sort of database, where a requirement for daily deposits over £25/£50 is to check such a database. I'm not sure how this could operate however to ensure the reliability of it as of course each person could have interchangable details like email address, bank cards etc. Perhaps a credit check style screening where you must put in a National Insurance number or Driving Licence number?

I'm not sure either of those would work but it would be worth thinking about. And before anyone says anything about responsbility. I 100% take full responsbility of my actions and do not expect the government to baby me. However, I strongly believe when I thought I might have had a problem (probably about 18 months ago) - if I locked out of everything, I would have had time to escape the bubble and see it from a different point of view and not be constantly sucked in to the point of not realising what I was doing to myself and my family.

I think that really there should be some mileage in tackling the social responsibility standards.

I had gambling problems a few years back and self excluded from the major bookmakers. However recently I had a relapse and have blown thousands on 21.co.uk. Spending several hours in a session, using 4 different cards, going on there and blowing a few thousand in a few minutes, having my bank/credit cards declined as all the money has gone.

Clearly, this is a sign of problem gambling. However what did 21.co.uk do? Well they set me up as an elite VIP member and fed me more free betting money.

Looking back now in the sobering cold light of being skint again this is pretty staggering for a company who display the Gamcare logo.

Obviously I am feeling stupid and ashamed and I take responsibility for my actions but I can't help feeling that there should and could have been more action taken???

I can't wait for this online multi exlude to start in Dec by games top I hope they help us

I work part time in a bar and if someone came up to me obviously intoxicated I would refuse to serve them. This wouldn't stop them trying to get served elsewhere and chances are they would get their hands on some alcohol. Then look at a CG in a bookies for example - he/she has been in all day (apart from the numerous trips to the bank machine) losing hundreds or thousands. Does the bookie tell them they have had enough? 99.99% of the time 'No' is the answer. It's not part of their job. Same with online companies - do they have someone keeping track of our transactions in and out? I would imagine so but would they say when they think you've had enough, again 'No' is the answer.

That's not to say they shouldn't intervene but I can only imagine what I'd have said if a bookie or online company told me I had enough in the midst of a session! The problem is that it's a lot more difficult to know someones gambling limits as opposed to their alcohol limits. Someone losing £100 means more to them than another losing 1k.

I can't see the law changing anytime soon as to how these operators work in terms of responsibility. Limits as mentioned above would be a good start and I'd be all in favour of that but there's too much money to be made so again can't see it happening

Its an interesting topic because as Sam Crow says I would not have been happy if told to stop during one of my sessions.

I would also have had a few choice words if told I didnt look as though I could afford it. I was an addict and I was part of the whole thing even if I actually wasnt in control.

The only time Ive seen someone asked to stop and leave was because he was upsetting other "customers" as the staff would term it. A wailing man will make other gamblers feel uneasy as it starts to bring them out of the trance

The complexity of a gambling addiction is that its not a substance even though the medical profession are now correctly classing it in the same chapter as substance abuse. In many ways ordinary people class it as the greedy getting their comeuppance.

The real answers to this directly affect the profits of the gambling dens and also the gambling taxes.

Im calm now and serene. I was having my weekly pint the other day and enjoying the music they play. I looked at the machine and felt completely indifferent.....no urges at all...i just casually and briefly thought they used to take my money and I fully understand the odds of those boxes now. I like that bar and have already mentioned to the staff Im not to be seen on it as I am a compulsive gambler. I will still use the present tense even after all these days gamble free since december 2015.

This forum is good so please use it.

Best wishes to everyone on the forum

I definitely think that the CSR of the gaming industry is highly questionable. I'd go so far to say that it's a stain on the free democratic society within which we live, especially having seen the increasng number of organisations that continue to jump on the bandwagon to offer slots / bingo / online gambling.

All business in the current era are using customer data to develop insights in order to move closer to, to better understand their customers and to improve the efficiency of their marketing. Of course these companies could use their understanding of the patterns of behaviour to identify a problem gambler and to intervene rather than to exploit... a problem gambler's activity must stand out a mile away.

I think it's disgusting and that companies should be made to actively identify and restrict, but that falls on our government to act as organisations themselves will never want to do it as it means to cut off their profit source. Someone has to give the vunerable a voice.

Good points Cc2017.

Betting companies can easily identify problem gambling habits. However, we are clearly a profitable source of income.

I understand points regarding some sort of block being placed during a session. I would have been hacked off too if this would have happened at the time of my gambling. However I might not be in such a financial mess now.

Why not:

Ban transactions from credit cards. I seem to remember this being in place with some companies at one time.

Restrict multiple transactions. Maybe 6 per day, 2 per hour?? Gives at least a chance to exit that headspin

I would liken this to a boxer being saved by a towel being thrown in the ring by his corner. The boxer nearly always wants to carry on even though they are taking a beating. However. with hindsight they are grateful for this.

As compulsive gamblers we want to carry on regardless and some sessions can be particularly destructive. It is those destructive sessions that are so hard to get over.

Stay strong everybody

I can't remember the date the meeting is but they are reviewing lots I'll give you example what I found of another person