Bet365 Fined £582K for Regulatory Breaches – What Does This Mean for Gamblers?

[Fortify]

If we look at what's happening now, a lot of gamblers are complaining about casinos being strict with KYC requirements. Sometimes, even long-time clients are asked for more than just basic documents, like proof of income or bank statements. But this isn’t abuse, they’re just doing their job. If they don’t comply, they could face huge penalties or even lose their license.

Take Bet365, for example ....it’s a massive casino valued in the billions. You can see more about it in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denise_Coates

Now imagine smaller casinos; they could shut down if they get hit with penalties for non-compliance. That’s why as gamblers, we should always choose reputable casinos. Even if they require KYC, at least we know our private information is safe because they’re being monitored by their license providers.

So, we shouldn’t worry about submitting KYC, as long as we stick to reputable casinos, as I’ve mentioned.

It means very little to gamblers, maybe the edge case scenarios will face slightly more restrictions and they may reject a few more people for failure to pass KYC type rules. However gambling companies see these fines as a cost of doing business, they can often make far more money by operating in a grey area and waiting for the regulator to wake up, than they would by adhering to the laws in the strictest possible way. If you consider the owner of this site walked away with hundreds of millions of dollars in profits last year, you can understand that this fine is a drop in the bucket compared to their wider profitability and will barely impact them at all.

[Russlenat]

It means very little to gamblers, maybe the edge case scenarios will face slightly more restrictions and they may reject a few more people for failure to pass KYC type rules. However gambling companies see these fines as a cost of doing business, they can often make far more money by operating in a grey area and waiting for the regulator to wake up, than they would by adhering to the laws in the strictest possible way. If you consider the owner of this site walked away with hundreds of millions of dollars in profits last year, you can understand that this fine is a drop in the bucket compared to their wider profitability and will barely impact them at all.

For a billion-dollar company like Bet365 to receive a fine of less than $1 million, it shows they are quite compliant. When regulators investigate, they will always find something, but in this case, it’s a minor non-compliance that doesn’t impact their license or reputation as a casino. Considering they operate in a country with strict legal standards, it’s safe to say Bet365 is doing well overall.

However, they shouldn’t take this lightly, as big problems often start small. They should make sure to comply fully, and maybe next time there won’t be any violations found--though that might be a challenge to achieve entirely.

[Porfirii]

It means very little to gamblers, maybe the edge case scenarios will face slightly more restrictions and they may reject a few more people for failure to pass KYC type rules. However gambling companies see these fines as a cost of doing business, they can often make far more money by operating in a grey area and waiting for the regulator to wake up, than they would by adhering to the laws in the strictest possible way. If you consider the owner of this site walked away with hundreds of millions of dollars in profits last year, you can understand that this fine is a drop in the bucket compared to their wider profitability and will barely impact them at all.

For a giant like the company we are talking about it is indeed a drop in the bucket, but fines like that can lead to ruin smaller casinos with fewer resources, even if the fine was proportionately lower.

But KYC for everything like some services are imposing to little gamblers in order to be able to withdraw in the cases that there is no doubt that there is nothing shady behind and the amounts are ridiculous is more dangerous IMO than being more permissive, not only because someone in the staff can go over the dark side and sell the personal data, but also because good faith leaks could also happen due to negligence, or attacks on vulnerabilities that would have been overlooked.

[YOSHIE]

Bet365 Fined £582K for Regulatory Breaches

If the regulations between the Bet365 casino and the government or private licensing party are already in operation and there is an agreement between Bet365 and the supervisory party, if there is a violation it is normal for them to get a fine, But what about the users who suffer losses, do they get their rights as well as the regulatory oversight authorities do.

This is apart from KYC measures, that is another matter, casinos and users, we understand that this regulation is intended for the public interest, on the basis of security and discipline of users and casinos, If fines are imposed on the Bet365 casino for violations of rules or laws, but users who feel disadvantaged do not get a sense of security and peace, for me it is useless.

It's possible that in the future it will happen again, a fine of £582,120 but the users who are harmed could reach double that fine, the casino really isn't at a loss, even though the source mentions money laundering, but I'm not sure about that.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Now imagine smaller casinos; they could shut down if they get hit with penalties for non-compliance. That’s why as gamblers, we should always choose reputable casinos. Even if they require KYC, at least we know our private information is safe because they’re being monitored by their license providers.

So, we shouldn’t worry about submitting KYC, as long as we stick to reputable casinos, as I’ve mentioned.

You have spoken really well, that amount of money may not seem to be huge to many of us, specially if we try to compare it to the amount of money that crypto exchanges are usually fined for any legal misconduct, but then, we all should know that crypto exchanges earn far more money than gambling casinos, and for a gambling casino to be fined this amount of money, it's really a huge one, several smaller casino will lose their license and or close down if fined such an amount.

I've said this a couple of times on this forum and as it regards to kyc that, passing kyc on gambling casino will become more strict, and as well more difficult as time goes on, specially with the growing regulations on online casinos since the covid-19 incident that have brought about a major boost and popularity of online casinos.

Other casinos can learn from this and try not to make the same mistakes that bet365 made that caused them to be fined.

[freedomgo]

If fines are imposed on the Bet365 casino for violations of rules or laws, but users who feel disadvantaged do not get a sense of security and peace, for me it is useless.

regulators are also protecting the users, like this news.

Bet365 ordered to refund $519K to customers who it paid less than they were entitled on sports bets

These regulators are different from the usual license providers that casinos commonly use, which often focus mainly on paperwork requirements and fall short of ensuring gambler protection. In short, those providers are usually just in it for the money.

[Findingnemo]

A casino should always comply whatever regulations are framed by the regulatory body or else they will face fines like that often which is why casinos are being vigilant with their strict verification standards or else they will face money laundering case on them and the fine depends on various factors. For us it's not really a big concern and we are already used to KYCed then as long as we don't breach their terms have nothing to do worry about it.

[Cookdata]

Now imagine smaller casinos; they could shut down if they get hit with penalties for non-compliance. That’s why as gamblers, we should always choose reputable casinos. Even if they require KYC, at least we know our private information is safe because they’re being monitored by their license providers.

So, we shouldn’t worry about submitting KYC, as long as we stick to reputable casinos, as I’ve mentioned.

I think before a fine is been thrown on casino, they look at what they are earn or perhaps there is an average money a casino do make if they judge by the numbers of players or they simply ask them of their revenue generated withing the period of the offense committed otherwise I don't see any many casino function after they slap that lawsuit amount on their head, there must be some sort of measures for casino to comply otherwise many  will died and wouldn't have money to sort it out.

Perhaps the KYC anti money laundering is improving but the history has never been a good for the crypto industry because it defeated the purpose of privacy and what is casino if there is no privacy for the players. Back then people that owns Bitcoin protect and value their privacy and because they want to increase their hold of Bitcoin, the send to casino to bet to make more Bitcoin and still want to maintain their privacy but regulations is fast changing and doesn't want to do that anymore, so people who still want to gamble just had to use them.

[Silberman]

A casino should always comply whatever regulations are framed by the regulatory body or else they will face fines like that often which is why casinos are being vigilant with their strict verification standards or else they will face money laundering case on them and the fine depends on various factors. For us it's not really a big concern and we are already used to KYCed then as long as we don't breach their terms have nothing to do worry about it.

Casino owners do not really have any other option but to cooperate with the authorities, after all the investment they have put forward on their casinos is not something that can be given up easily even for them, so if a government pass a new law forcing them to implement stronger KYC policies, they will implement them even if this means alienating some of their customers, as they prefer to lose them than the alternative, which would be to lose their whole business.

[Reatim]

For a billion-dollar company like Bet365 to receive a fine of less than $1 million, it shows they are quite compliant. When regulators investigate, they will always find something, but in this case, it’s a minor non-compliance that doesn’t impact their license or reputation as a casino. Considering they operate in a country with strict legal standards, it’s safe to say Bet365 is doing well overall.

They probably do not want to make it bigger than it is. If they try to resist, then they might just pay a bigger fine or worse be nitpicked by the authorities and get investigated for things they do not want to. It is always better to just comply at the first warning or first penalty. Even small-scale casinos would want to comply at the very first breach even if it might cause them. I do not think anything good can come out of trying to escape regulatory policies. They probably also do not have the resources to defend themselves if the casino is a small scale.

So Bet365 not using any more of their resources to try and outsmart the authorities might be a good thing for them as they will probably save more money doing this. I do not think the changes they will be implementing is that drastic, anyway and would not affect their customer rates as much.

[Natalim]

So Bet365 not using any more of their resources to try and outsmart the authorities might be a good thing for them as they will probably save more money doing this. I do not think the changes they will be implementing is that drastic, anyway and would not affect their customer rates as much.

They can’t outsmart the authorities, as the regulators’ findings are clear. Bet365 likely won’t be bothered by paying £582K, as that’s a small sum for them--probably less than their daily income. The issue was "social responsibility failures," which are minor shortcomings in their implementation, and that's why the fines are relatively low.

[Webetcoins]

KYC is not a new thing, so this must not be the latest issue and for me, I don't find KYC that strict because I'm only/usually being asked by my name and mobile number. If it was an advanced one then it can include an ID and a selfie.

What I consider strict are the wagering requirements of the bonuses that are offered by the casinos. This is not new either but this issue can likely remain even in the future because it may seem impossible for the casino to lower their wagering requirements as that can backfire them. Anyways, for those who are being asked more than the KYC requirements that I listed earlier, maybe they did something unusual?

I think winning a big amount can be an unusual thing too. At first, we blame the casino for this but after doing a research about these KYC's, we are now aware that this doesn't came from them. It make sense because their goal is supposed to give more convenience, as that can make their business more fruitful.

Small casinos are still small, so they may get exempted for this, though they may need need comply for something like legality or having a license, for them to operate with a peace of mind. Most gamblers play for the profit, so obviously they are always making sure that the casino that they play is reputable because if not, they won't get paid if they win and they may not even win at all.

[shasan]

At least you can be sure that the casino will not operate anything illegally if they are making you undergoing KYC and is trusted in the market. Even then if you are not comfortable sharing your private details, dont forget that those "private" info is already out there considering the poor database security of the government websites and databases.

Now if you really want to stay away from all that, you would have to stop gambling which would not be the case if we are in this section of the forum.

You are right and I agree with you that the KYC document might be shared with a third party for the weak database and/or the data might be shared anywhere the data is submitted for a job or anything else. If we are afraid about the KYC document then we have to stay away from everywhere where we need to share KYC documents.