Gambling Commission Approves Affordability Checks Despite Racing, Bookmaker Opposition

The Gambling Commission has approved affordability checks gambling operators must conduct on high-spending customers, despite fierce opposition from the racing and bookmaking industries. The controversial financial risk assessments will apply to punters with net deposits exceeding £1,000 in a rolling 24-hour period or £3,000 over 90 days. The decision has triggered significant backlash from racing stakeholders who warn the sport could lose as much as £250 million in revenues over five years. Equally important, projections suggest around 120,000 racing punters would face enhanced Gambling Commission affordability checks, with approximately 96,000 expected to refuse compliance. This resistance could reduce betting turnover and result in losses exceeding £13 million annually in Horserace Betting Levy receipts.

Gambling Commission Approves Financial Risk Assessments for High-Spending Punters

Financial risk assessments represent a data-led approach to identifying customers who may be experiencing financial difficulties. Unlike traditional affordability checks, these assessments make no evaluation of a customer’s income or spending capacity. The Gambling Commission clarified the distinction, stating financial risk assessments target customers showing signs of current significant or imminently worsening financial difficulties through indicators such as significant arrears, defaults, or bankruptcy.

The assessments trigger automatically when customers reach spending thresholds placing them in the top 3 percent of gambling spenders. Credit reference agencies conduct these checks using existing financial data rather than requiring manual document submissions. Pilot results demonstrated 97 percent of the approximately 1.7 million assessments completed in Stage Two occurred without customer friction. Only 0.1 percent of active accounts would both require an assessment and be unable to receive one frictionlessly.

The Commission emphasized the thresholds serve as triggers rather than spending limits or caps. Operators received guidance that document validation following assessments would be unnecessary and create meaningless friction for consumers. Customers under 25 years showed higher unmatched rates compared to those 25 and over. The assessments do not affect consumer credit ratings during the pilot or if implemented.

Racing Industry Warns of £250 Million Revenue Loss Over Five Years

Arena Racing Company chief executive Martin Cruddace warned proposed reforms would prove disastrous for British horseracing, potentially making the UK the “sick man” of Europe’s racing industry. Industry leaders issued this stark warning in a joint letter to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, supported by seven major racing organizations including The Jockey Club, British Racecourse Association, and National Trainers Federation.

Betting and Gaming Council modeling revealed net loss thresholds set at £1,000 in 24 hours and £2,000 over 90 days would trigger enhanced Gambling Commission affordability checks for approximately 120,000 racing bettors. Nearly 45,000 of those punters would subsequently shift to illegal markets. Media rights payments face significant reductions, with funding potentially decreasing by 15 percent, representing approximately £25-30 million in losses.

A survey of nearly 15,000 horserace bettors conducted in October 2023 demonstrated widespread resistance to affordability checks gambling requirements. More than half indicated they would stop betting or reduce stakes if new checks were implemented. One in four bettors reported already undergoing checks, while four in ten expressed willingness to use black market operators if stringent measures proceeded.

Monthly turnover declined 15-20 percent year-on-year through 2024, following a £900 million year-on-year drop in 2022-23.

BHA Chief Condemns Decision as ‘Self-Harm on Immense Scale’

British Horseracing Authority chief executive Brant Dunshea issued a scathing response, branding the Gambling Commission decision “one of self-harm on an immense scale”. He stated the checks would subject racing bettors to unwarranted levels of intrusion while having severe financial implications for British racing and the UK economy.

Dunshea warned the measures would drive more customers to the illegal market, putting them at much greater risk of gambling-related harm and starving the Treasury of much needed tax revenue. He accused the Department for Culture, Media and Sport of “a clear abdication of duty” by failing to grip the process or properly consider damaging consequences.

The pilot exposed significant technical problems. Credit Reference Agencies produced different results for the same customer, raising concerns about reliability. Consequently, the BHA insisted no implementation should proceed before these glaring issues were resolved. Stakeholders criticized the Commission for moving forward without publishing the NatCen independent review, leaving implementation working group members without access to vital evidence.

In contrast, Sarah Gardner, acting chief executive of the Gambling Commission, defended the approach, stating high-quality data would enable support for customers in financial difficulties while reducing friction by removing unnecessary document checks.