When online tournaments are cancelled
07-22-2023
, 06:59 AM
Fred Done up to his old tricks again. Fined £3.25 million for KYC and AML malpractice. Fleecing addicts and allowing terrorists to launder money
https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.u...blic-statement
I think he's going to take it out on his staff by making women work alone later at night and also offering worse odds/no pushes/reducing offers on multis.
Quote:
certain customers were able to stake large amounts of money without the Licensee conducting appropriate KYC checks. For example:
Customer A reached a net loss position of £61,000 within a four-month period with no appropriate KYC being conducted
Customer B hit the AML trigger of £250,000 staked in 365 days. The customer’s ID was only requested after a 10-day delay, which the Licensee was unable to explain
Customer C staked and lost £72,000 within a 9-month period due to the Licensee relying on uncorroborated open-source information
Customer D staked £429,222 and lost £120,353 within a 11-month period due to the Licensee relying on uncorroborated open-source information
Customer F played for a period of five months and deposited £337,029 with a loss of £19,336.28 and placed a total of 1,375 bets. The customer was interacted with 12 times and the Licensee noted that each interaction was positive and indicated the customer was happy at his level of spend. However, during some interactions the customer demonstrated signs of potential harms such as his card being declined and placing large bets. The interactions did not escalate in any way and there is no evidence to suggest this customer was offered any information or support. The only factor that appears to have been considered was whether the customer appeared happy to continue to gamble.
Customer A reached a net loss position of £61,000 within a four-month period with no appropriate KYC being conducted
Customer B hit the AML trigger of £250,000 staked in 365 days. The customer’s ID was only requested after a 10-day delay, which the Licensee was unable to explain
Customer C staked and lost £72,000 within a 9-month period due to the Licensee relying on uncorroborated open-source information
Customer D staked £429,222 and lost £120,353 within a 11-month period due to the Licensee relying on uncorroborated open-source information
Customer F played for a period of five months and deposited £337,029 with a loss of £19,336.28 and placed a total of 1,375 bets. The customer was interacted with 12 times and the Licensee noted that each interaction was positive and indicated the customer was happy at his level of spend. However, during some interactions the customer demonstrated signs of potential harms such as his card being declined and placing large bets. The interactions did not escalate in any way and there is no evidence to suggest this customer was offered any information or support. The only factor that appears to have been considered was whether the customer appeared happy to continue to gamble.
I think he's going to take it out on his staff by making women work alone later at night and also offering worse odds/no pushes/reducing offers on multis.