search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Interactive AML COMPLIANCE


AML Compliance: When Is the Gaming Sector Going to Stop Gambling with Profits?


Jane Jee, CEO, Kompli-Global


After qualifying as a barrister, Jane gained broad experience in card-based, e-money, Internet and mobile payments having worked in commercial (marketing) and legal roles in the sector for over 20 years. Jane is now focused on delivering Kompli Global’s unique Compliance Service which fully meets the regulatory requirements and enables clients to take on new business and retain it, confident that they have access to the best available information and expertise to fulfil their compliance obligations.


The sums involved are substantial, precisely because the failings at all of these companies are so significant. If gaming operators and other organisations in the industry want to protect themselves from the legal ramifications of complicity in criminal activity, they need to up their game now. If they don’t, we can expect to see more such reports in the future.


P74 NEWSWIRE / INTERACTIVE / MARKET DATA


A new wave of penalties meted out by the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) have increased pressure on gaming companies to wake up and address the failings in their anti-money laundering (AML) compliance regimes


Jane Jee, CEO of RegTech specialist Kompli-Global, explains that there is no longer any excuse for gambling companies to play roulette with their reputations.


In recent weeks, the press has been full of reports that UK betting site, Paddy Power Betfair, has been fined £2.2m by the UKGC for failing to protect customers who showed signs of problem gambling[1]. Making matters worse, the Gambling Commission had found evidence that stolen money had been used to place bets on the site.


In its report into the case, the UKGC claimed that Paddy Power “failed to adequately interact with customers who were displaying signs of problem gambling and failed to adequately carry out anti-money laundering checks” as part of its requirements under anti-money laundering regulation.


Unfortunately, you won’t need a particularly powerful memory to recall the last time that a gaming operator was penalised in the UK. We saw a £6.2 million fine handed to William Hill in February 2018 for a "systemic senior management failure to prevent money laundering", which meant ten customers were allowed to deposit money sourced through criminal activity[2].


In August 2017, online casino operator 888 was given a £7.8 million penalty by UKGC for failing to stop problem gamblers using its services, with one case "so significant that it resulted in criminal activity"[3].


Te sums involved are substantial, precisely because the failings at all of these companies are so significant. If gaming operators and other organisations in the industry want to protect themselves from the legal ramifications of complicity in criminal activity, they need to up their game now. If they don’t, we can expect to see more such reports in the future.


THE IMPORTANCE OF KYC As with businesses in other sectors, gaming


companies are legally obliged to meet the rigorous requirements of AML regulations, particularly with regards to “Know Your Customer” (KYC) legislation. Tis means taking steps to verify customers’ identities and determine whether they have known links to criminal activity.


Compliance with such legislation entails


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92