UK fines online casino for only asking KYC from winning gamblers

[Blawpaw]

One fairly common complain among gamblers is they are allowed to make a deposit at casinos and lose their money without any issue, but if they happen to win and they want to make a withdrawal then they are hit with a KYC request almost immediately, Tonybet a fiat Estonian casino was fined more than 400,000 pounds for this practice and it seems the regulators are now interested in making reforms to the laws and force casinos to also make checks on those gamblers which have lost a lot of money.

If those new regulations are passed they will affect not only fiat casinos but cryptocurrency casinos will have to eventually follow them as well, do you agree with this idea? Would you like to see casinos to be fined more often for the practice of only asking for personal information from winning gamblers or do you think this will have a harmful effect on their finances?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/18/tonybet-fined-regulator-online-betting-id-checks-terms

This was very predictable. If you think about it, kyc is not only to know your customer but as it is to control the Casino itself. In this case, they were only doing KYC to customers trying to withdraw so, with this they would only declare what they were losing and not what they were earning. reason for this is that if a gambler does not try to withdraw he will not be asked for kyc so they will not count with the losing players who actually are the ones giving profits to the casino.

[robelneo]

One fairly common complain among gamblers is they are allowed to make a deposit at casinos and lose their money without any issue, but if they happen to win and they want to make a withdrawal then they are hit with a KYC request almost immediately, Tonybet a fiat Estonian casino was fined more than 400,000 pounds for this practice and it seems the regulators are now interested in making reforms to the laws and force casinos to also make checks on those gamblers which have lost a lot of money.

If those new regulations are passed they will affect not only fiat casinos but cryptocurrency casinos will have to eventually follow them as well, do you agree with this idea? Would you like to see casinos to be fined more often for the practice of only asking for personal information from winning gamblers or do you think this will have a harmful effect on their finances?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/18/tonybet-fined-regulator-online-betting-id-checks-terms

I support and agree with the move and idea, if players win a big amount and players lose a big amount, they are on the same boat and they spent big money so its just right in name of transparency and compliance that they ask KYC if they have it in their terms, so many casinos are just asking KYC when you win or when you lose, it should be on the money they wagered.
But the big question is can they fully implement it can they apply it to all casinos although the idea is good, implementation is another thing unless the license issuer stated it that way.

[harizen]

But the big question is can they fully implement it can they apply it to all casinos although the idea is good, implementation is another thing unless the license issuer stated it that way.

If referring to fiat casinos, yes that can be fully implemented since these casinos are under the country's main gambling authority.

If referring to crypto casinos, that might only be fully implemented in those big casinos that have no choice but to accept the regulation. There are also decentralized gambling sites that obviously, won't be part of that.

More importantly, regardless if there's KYC or not, don't test the waters on unknown gambling sites. Better to comply with KYC than face the risks at those.

[Fatunad]

But the big question is can they fully implement it can they apply it to all casinos although the idea is good, implementation is another thing unless the license issuer stated it that way.

If referring to fiat casinos, yes that can be fully implemented since these casinos are under the country's main gambling authority.

If referring to crypto casinos, that might only be fully implemented in those big casinos that have no choice but to accept the regulation. There are also decentralized gambling sites that obviously, won't be part of that.

More importantly, regardless if there's KYC or not, don't test the waters on unknown gambling sites. Better to comply with KYC than face the risks at those.

Why people are really that making it as a big issue about exposing off their identities which considering that we've been long time submitting our info into those services and other things dealing in real life?
It doesnt really make sense though, myself wont really be bothered on submitting info as long i would be seeing that it would be something you could really trust on.KYC is getting stricter and
becomes wider on which even crypto related services and platforms is no really exception into that which we should really gradually expecting the reality that we are dealing
of with.

[Zlantann]

One fairly common complain among gamblers is they are allowed to make a deposit at casinos and lose their money without any issue, but if they happen to win and they want to make a withdrawal then they are hit with a KYC request almost immediately, Tonybet a fiat Estonian casino was fined more than 400,000 pounds for this practice and it seems the regulators are now interested in making reforms to the laws and force casinos to also make checks on those gamblers which have lost a lot of money.

If those new regulations are passed they will affect not only fiat casinos but cryptocurrency casinos will have to eventually follow them as well, do you agree with this idea? Would you like to see casinos to be fined more often for the practice of only asking for personal information from winning gamblers or do you think this will have a harmful effect on their finances?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/18/tonybet-fined-regulator-online-betting-id-checks-terms

I support and agree with the move and idea, if players win a big amount and players lose a big amount, they are on the same boat and they spent big money so its just right in name of transparency and compliance that they ask KYC if they have it in their terms, so many casinos are just asking KYC when you win or when you lose, it should be on the money they wagered.
But the big question is can they fully implement it can they apply it to all casinos although the idea is good, implementation is another thing unless the license issuer stated it that way.

I also support the fine imposed on the Estonian casino or gambling company because this is a double standard. The same requirement used to deposit funds should also be what is needed for withdrawals. It seems the government is getting so much complaints as regards this bad practice and they feel it is necessary to take action.

But it is also important for gamblers to read the Tos of these gambling firms because it might be an evidence for or against the person. This is because some of these firms have different rules for deposit and withdrawal and these regulations are sometimes hidden in the terms of service. You can gladly refer to the rules of the casino company if you feel they are going against their own rules.

[Obari]

If we players can actually stay true to ourselves we'll understand that one of the only way the casino can stay in balance with regulatory bodies asking for KYC and gamblers not winning to do KYC and the casino wanting to stay in business is the fact that KYC should be with a triggered point and one of the points a KYC should be triggered is upon withdrawal but not just withdrawal but withdrawal above certain amount like $1k and any amount below such shouldn't have to trigger a KYC.
If gamblers could easily and willingly ready to do KYC, I wouldn't think there would have been any major issues with KYC and we should also understand that casinos is another man's business and being happy seeing them been fined over some irrelevant issues isn't fair.

[traderethereum]

If we players can actually stay true to ourselves we'll understand that one of the only way the casino can stay in balance with regulatory bodies asking for KYC and gamblers not winning to do KYC and the casino wanting to stay in business is the fact that KYC should be with a triggered point and one of the points a KYC should be triggered is upon withdrawal but not just withdrawal but withdrawal above certain amount like $1k and any amount below such shouldn't have to trigger a KYC.
If gamblers could easily and willingly ready to do KYC, I wouldn't think there would have been any major issues with KYC and we should also understand that casinos is another man's business and being happy seeing them been fined over some irrelevant issues isn't fair.

It will depend on each gambler because many gamblers don't do KYC because they want to withdraw their winnings but the casino insists on asking the winner to do KYC.
And the casino is aware of this and does not try to apply KYC to the winner if the casino has limits on the amount of winning the money they can withdraw without having to do KYC.
But most casinos make that rule to the winners and it makes a lot of winners who have already won the game and want their winning money to be upset.
If there are such regulations in crypto casinos, surely the casinos will have to evaluate their regulations and may need to add other things related to regulations from those regulators.

[rodskee]

One fairly common complain among gamblers is they are allowed to make a deposit at casinos and lose their money without any issue, but if they happen to win and they want to make a withdrawal then they are hit with a KYC request almost immediately, Tonybet a fiat Estonian casino was fined more than 400,000 pounds for this practice and it seems the regulators are now interested in making reforms to the laws and force casinos to also make checks on those gamblers which have lost a lot of money.

If those new regulations are passed they will affect not only fiat casinos but cryptocurrency casinos will have to eventually follow them as well, do you agree with this idea? Would you like to see casinos to be fined more often for the practice of only asking for personal information from winning gamblers or do you think this will have a harmful effect on their finances?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/18/tonybet-fined-regulator-online-betting-id-checks-terms

this will let other casino to open their eyes and never to abused their power over gamblers that trusted them in depositing and losing but once get to win they are taking this measure for a chance of not complying so they need nothing to pay them as they also knew that mostly gamblers online hates KYC verifications.

[klidex]

One fairly common complain among gamblers is they are allowed to make a deposit at casinos and lose their money without any issue, but if they happen to win and they want to make a withdrawal then they are hit with a KYC request almost immediately, Tonybet a fiat Estonian casino was fined more than 400,000 pounds for this practice and it seems the regulators are now interested in making reforms to the laws and force casinos to also make checks on those gamblers which have lost a lot of money.

If those new regulations are passed they will affect not only fiat casinos but cryptocurrency casinos will have to eventually follow them as well, do you agree with this idea? Would you like to see casinos to be fined more often for the practice of only asking for personal information from winning gamblers or do you think this will have a harmful effect on their finances?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/18/tonybet-fined-regulator-online-betting-id-checks-terms

It's possible for a casino to ask for KYC when a user wins a game or bet that is big enough and wants to make a withdrawal because the casino doesn't want negative things to happen, for example when a win is won from playing unfairly or cheating has been in the casino.
Even though we really don't know what the real intentions and goals of the casino are asking for KYC only when making a withdrawal of a large enough amount.
If KYC is requested at the time of deposit it is clear that the casino does not want users who register and make deposit transactions to use or be involved in cases of embezzlement or money laundering which can drag the name of the casino into the case that is currently happening to the user.
I think there are not a few casinos that ask for KYC only when making a withdrawal and this needs to be fixed again. If KYC is on the surface, it's better to ask for it at the beginning when making a registration or first deposit.

[wiss19]

Not all casinos are like that (the way you describe it) but there are some casinos who already mandate KYC in the beginning and then there are also casinos who only ask a KYC for the withdrawals who are really huge.

It's also the fault of the user. They won't be shocked and complain about this matter if only they are not lazy and knows how to read the terms and condition of the online casino that they will use. That new bill they are trying to pass seems positive for those who don't like the idea of surprise KYC but I think this was very alarming if this hit the crypto casino. Many of them are surely going to be discouraged to operate. We should be careful what we wish for.

[hilariousetc]

This shouldn't be standard practice and actually think it's quite shady as it gives you them an out if someone wins big and you then have an easy excuse not to pay them. I know most bitcoin gambling sites operate in a grey area and many pick and chose what they comply with but they shouldn't let you play at all if they're only going to ask for verification later. I think it's fine for further verification if you suspect something is amiss but not if that's the first time you've been asked to do it. A lot of people probably won't even use a real name if they even ask for one in the first place so that alone could lead to issues down the line.

I have a feeling this is argued as something that happens in normal casinos so its fine to do online but I doubt that actually works out law wise (eg we can only hold £100,000 in our casino and need to bank transfer/cheque for higher).

I'm surprised it's taken them this long to consider it illegal though and something worth investigating (perhaps it's just that a case has only now been brought against them).

This doesn't happen in the UK. You have to verify before you can use them which should be the way. Might not be the case in casinos on the street but it is online.

[maydna]

Not all casinos are like that (the way you describe it) but there are some casinos who already mandate KYC in the beginning and then there are also casinos who only ask a KYC for the withdrawals who are really huge.

It's also the fault of the user. They won't be shocked and complain about this matter if only they are not lazy and knows how to read the terms and condition of the online casino that they will use. That new bill they are trying to pass seems positive for those who don't like the idea of surprise KYC but I think this was very alarming if this hit the crypto casino. Many of them are surely going to be discouraged to operate. We should be careful what we wish for.

Many gamblers think that online casino terms and conditions are the same between one casino and another. That is why many eventually find out that casinos have terms and conditions, one of which is about doing KYC at registration or when you want to make a large withdrawal. .

The casinos may be discouraged from operating, especially for casinos that often deceive their users by not paying their winnings for various reasons. This KYC issue is a serious problem for crypto gamblers because we don't want to reveal our identity to any site. But we also can't do anything if the terms and conditions of the casino are like that and we can only look for casinos that are not too strict in carrying out their rules.

[BigBos]

One fairly common complain among gamblers is they are allowed to make a deposit at casinos and lose their money without any issue, but if they happen to win and they want to make a withdrawal then they are hit with a KYC request almost immediately, Tonybet a fiat Estonian casino was fined more than 400,000 pounds for this practice and it seems the regulators are now interested in making reforms to the laws and force casinos to also make checks on those gamblers which have lost a lot of money.

If those new regulations are passed they will affect not only fiat casinos but cryptocurrency casinos will have to eventually follow them as well, do you agree with this idea? Would you like to see casinos to be fined more often for the practice of only asking for personal information from winning gamblers or do you think this will have a harmful effect on their finances?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/18/tonybet-fined-regulator-online-betting-id-checks-terms

I'm not sure about the security of personal data if KYC is needed for that, and in my opinion this policy carried out by gambling sites is unfair, people who have lost their money on the site do not apply anything, but lucky people win in the gambling then when you want to withdraw the money is subject to the conditions that you have to do KYC, it's as if the bookies are not willing to give the money that the gambler makes without the winner providing the data, in my opinion that's unfair.

I myself do not agree if KYC is applied to all gambling sites, especially gambling with crypto currency because I think email and cellphone numbers are enough.
If that is the case, regulations must be set to provide a middle ground for gamblers and gambling owners in UK.

[madnessteat]

^

If you study the field of selling anonymized data, you will understand that if a person uses Google, and in principle the rest of the services on the Internet, so much information has already been collected on you that it is easy to determine who you are and where you come from. If someone really needs it, he can easily buy all of your data, down to passport, phone number, bank accounts even if you never passed KYC in a cryptocurrency casino.

So the question arises, if there is any point in saving information that can already be purchased?

[YOSHIE]

Would you like to see casinos to be fined more often for the practice of only asking for personal information from winning gamblers or do you think this will have a harmful effect on their finances?

Tonybet's actions are not much different from the online gambling industry in general, KYC is a surefire trick for gambling companies, to reason with the aim of not wanting to pay winning users, disclaiming responsibility to users who bet, strange, every year the company takes money from users who bet hundreds of dollars, it doesn't matter, but it's the user's turn to win, reason with a thousand reasons, ridiculous, KYC, the most effective trick.

I agree with the government's action of imposing some super strict requirements on online gambling companies operating in their territory, requirements for gambling operators, will provide a deterrent effect for other online casinos, what Tonybet is doing is a strong warning to other gambling companies, in protecting users who bet and win at gambling companies in the region.

[ultrloa]

Good idea to implement that since several casino claims that they are Kyc free but in the end once their player win a huge prize they ask KYC and tell that this is for verification purposes. This case is totally insane since in the first place they are the one claims that their gamblers don't need to submit their id but in the end they are been deceived by this greedy casinos. That's why somehow its good to pass the law and required every player to do Kyc first since we can avoid further problems for providing it immediately and casino might not get any excuse to delay our winnings.

[Silberman]

If we players can actually stay true to ourselves we'll understand that one of the only way the casino can stay in balance with regulatory bodies asking for KYC and gamblers not winning to do KYC and the casino wanting to stay in business is the fact that KYC should be with a triggered point and one of the points a KYC should be triggered is upon withdrawal but not just withdrawal but withdrawal above certain amount like $1k and any amount below such shouldn't have to trigger a KYC.
If gamblers could easily and willingly ready to do KYC, I wouldn't think there would have been any major issues with KYC and we should also understand that casinos is another man's business and being happy seeing them been fined over some irrelevant issues isn't fair.

I agree with the idea that KYC should be triggered at a certain point, like when a withdrawal is above a certain amount like $1k. This can help balance the needs of the casino to stay in compliance with regulatory bodies while also protecting the privacy of the gambler.

However, it's important to consider that not all players may be comfortable sharing their personal information with a casino. Some may have valid reasons for wanting to keep their identity hidden, such as privacy concerns or fear of fraud. In these cases, it's important for the casino to have alternative methods in place to verify the player's identity, such as through a third-party service. This way, players can still enjoy the benefits of gambling while also maintaining their privacy.

But if this is how things worked then another point of failure will exist, the more services have your data the higher the risk that at some point your data will be exposed, so while this may seem like a good idea once you put it into practice it will increase the risk we are already confronting, so as we can see there are not easy solutions when it comes to try to balance the needs of the casino as they are forced to implement identity checks by the governments and the wants gamblers have of being able to gamble without having to go through those checks.

[Oceat]

Good idea to implement that since several casino claims that they are Kyc free but in the end once their player win a huge prize they ask KYC and tell that this is for verification purposes. This case is totally insane since in the first place they are the one claims that their gamblers don't need to submit their id but in the end they are been deceived by this greedy casinos. That's why somehow its good to pass the law and required every player to do Kyc first since we can avoid further problems for providing it immediately and casino might not get any excuse to delay our winnings.

I totally agree with that since it's a common practice among on all online casino therefore no one is safe when someone would win a jackpot on a certain casino. They would all face the same tactics as what these casinos been doing for years to avoid giving the jackpot prize to their winner.

I hope this will be implemented in all of the online casino all over the world to avoid further damage to the future winners. These tactics has been used for so many years by the casinos yet it took their government too long to recognize the problem. Perhaps, someone who did win wasn't just somebody that they can easily be played with their KYC tactics.

[Cryptomultiplier]

I have always thought KYC was a requirement for signing up with a casino. Stories I have read on this subject matter disapproves with the fact that what we thought was free in the beginning and enticed us to join, suddenly turns around and bites us. It is part of the coy or gimmick employed to lure in those looking for freebies.
With the UK government stepping up to redeem those who have won big from being cornered by these casinos with the excuse of KYC, gamblers and other users would be sure to join more casinos and fulfil any verification at the beginning to avoid hassles once it is time to collect winnings.

[dothebeats]

Good idea to implement that since several casino claims that they are Kyc free but in the end once their player win a huge prize they ask KYC and tell that this is for verification purposes. This case is totally insane since in the first place they are the one claims that their gamblers don't need to submit their id but in the end they are been deceived by this greedy casinos. That's why somehow its good to pass the law and required every player to do Kyc first since we can avoid further problems for providing it immediately and casino might not get any excuse to delay our winnings.

In crypto casinos, they are requiring basic KYCs for most of the platforms that I've signed up with. Level 2 verification only occurs when there are problems detected on your account that the casino thinks you're cheating the system, or you just won big and, for KYC/AML compliance, they need to do further verification of who you really are. For that online casino that the government fined, they are obviously not complying with KYC/AML regulations, hence why they received the fine in the first place. Delaying winnings are totally not okay, and asking for KYC only after someone wins is totally fishy because that is already a breach of what the regulation on KYC/AML states.