UK LEGAL
2023 consultation, that operators offering a “not protected” level be required to remind customers of this on a regular basis. The Commission’s final decision is that this reminder will need to be issued once every six months, also referencing the value of funds held for the customer. The customer will need to acknowledge receipt of this information before being permitting to gamble further.
Customers will therefore be able to choose not to set a limit, but they will need to take action to confirm that decision before being permitted to proceed to deposit money or gamble. This confirmation can take the form of ticking a box, dismissing a message or some other action by the customer. For existing customers without financial limits, the changes will require the operator to prompt them to review this position on at least an annual basis. Operators will also be required to provide the facility to set limits via direct and clearly visible links on the homepage and deposit pages.
When it comes to choosing a limit, under the new requirements customers must be presented with a ‘free text’ box to type in their desired limit. Concerns were expressed in responses to the consultation about this creating scope for user error, so the Commission has included the option for the gambling system to permit specific monetary increments, such as whole pounds. The option of offering a drop down menu or slider instead was rejected by the Commission, on the basis that the appropriate high and low point of these would vary for each customer. These new requirements will come into force on 31 October 2025, through changes to RTS 12.
TRANSPARENCY ON CUSTOMER FUNDS
Currently, all gambling operators (with limited exceptions) who hold customer funds must provide in their terms and conditions, and in written information when the customer first deposits funds, how their funds will be protected in the event of the company’s insolvency. This includes setting out the level of protection according the Commission’s scale and the method by which this level of protection is achieved. For those operators meeting only the minimum
26 MARCH 2025
Melanie is a gambling regulatory lawyer with 13 years’ experience in the sector. Melanie advises on all aspects of gambling law including licence applications, compliance, advertising, licence reviews and changes of control. She has acted for a wide range of gambling operators including major online and land-based bookmakers and casinos, B2B game and software suppliers and start-ups. She also frequently advises operators of raffles, prize competitions, free draws and social gaming products. Melanie has a particular interest in the use of new technology for gambling products and novel product ideas.
requirement of keeping customer funds in a segregated account, they must state that the funds are “not protected”.
Where some form of structure is in place to ensure customer funds are protected in the event of insolvency, operators can state that the funds have either “medium” or “high” protection, depending on the nature of the arrangements in place.
The Commission proposed, in its Autumn
In its impact assessment, the Commission considered that the greatest impact of this new requirement would be felt by land-based casinos due to the logistical difficulties in issuing these reminders and receiving acknowledgement. The Commission felt, despite objections from the trade body, that operators should already hold customers’ postal addresses for AML verification purposes, so could use this to send a communication every six months if needed. Casino operators may prefer to avoid this administrative burden by putting arrangements in place that meet the “medium” or “high” protection levels – this is likely to require a detailed exploration of options with the casino’s bank.
This new requirement will also come into effect from 31 October 2025.
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
