UK LEGAL COMMENT
What’s in a word F
rom 12 September 2022, remote gambling operators licensed by the Gambling Commission will be required to ensure that “industry learning”, including public statements from the Commission’s casework, is reviewed and
implemented into their policy and procedures. Despite not being subject to this new guidance, the Commission nevertheless has an expectation that non-remote operators review and learn from these public statements. So, it seems like a good time to consider the recent statements issued by the Commission and pick out which “learning” should be incorporated and how. A total of eight public statements have been released in
the past year. In addition, regulatory action has led to three operating licences being revoked and nine fines being issued against operators, but it is the voluntary settlements which led to the publication of “learning” for the industry. Although the new requirement specifically relates to
customer interaction learnings, many issues feed into this, for example a failure to obtain adequate source of funds information could lead to missing the need to conduct an interaction with a customer who might be gambling beyond their means. Most of the content of the public statements are likely to be in scope for this requirement (as well as the Commission’s general expectation), but some of the key customer interaction “learnings” are as follows.
Rationale for decisions
The importance of recording the rationale for decision making on customer interaction was highlighted in the public statements for VGC Leeds and Progress Play. The VGC Leeds casino was pulled up for recording a number of “no concern” interactions on a customer’s profile, with no rationale as to why the interaction was undertaken in the first place. It is clear that merely conducting an interaction is not sufficient, the casino must also make a note of the problem gambling indicator identified and the reason why, following the interaction, it was determined that no further action was required. A number of the public statements also highlight as “good
practice” logging decisions not to interact, including a sufficient level of detail (presumably about the rationale for that decision).
Automated alerts and action
Whilst the new customer interaction provisions make it a requirement that all operators implement automated processes to identify harm and take action where there are strong indicators of harm, the public statements also warn against over-reliance on automated processes. Jumpman gaming was criticised for “a reliance on automated, as opposed to human, interactions by the Licensee when customers hit SG alerts” and BV Gaming for “an overreliance on automated thresholds to request SoF”.
Northridge Law’s Melanie Ellis scrutinises just what the Gambling Commission means with the word ‘learning
30 AUGUST 2022
Proxima Studio/Adobe Stock
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
