Change
Change (person who gambled perspective)

Responsibilities for gambling companies

Many affected others want to see fundamental changes to how government regulates gambling companies to prevent harm to individuals, families, communities and society.

They say that gambling companies produce and advertise products that are designed to create addiction. There should be more controls on the types of products and services gambling companies are allowed to sell and how available and accessible they are, especially online. Additionally, gambling companies should be required to make sure consumers are not harmed by what they are selling. Responsibility should not be shifted solely onto consumers. Also, the industry needs to be held accountable for the harm it causes.

I’ve been fortunate to be able to be part of working with others as a result of being an affected other. I’ve been fortunate to meet many other individuals who like myself as an affected other really just have one desire. And it’s not a desire to stop the industry from being in existence. It’s a desire to try to stop any industry and in this case the gambling industry from using what I’ve classified as a modus operandi, a way of functioning that is designed to create addiction. In my view, that is not right, in any other business, it would be illegal and where it’s known that people are committing suicide as a consequence of having become addicted to a gambling product. You know, if any other industry was selling a product that created potentially or caused fatalities, I’m not too sure those industries would be allowed to exist, or they would definitely be facing court action against them and particularly the directors would…. How can the gambling industry not be accountable? How can the directors not be accountable? So, my view this needs to change.

And I think if they brought in, in my own view, a duty of care and each director was held accountable to making sure whatever services or products they offered were those that were not causing avoidable harm. You know, you can’t stop all harm from occurring, but where you can take steps to reduce avoidable harm you should be legally required to do so. And in my view, the industry is not. And whilst they will say well, we have all these things that you can do as an individual, you can set your own cap, you can do this or do that as a gambler. They also will know because if I know and I’m told this by specialists, they must also know that those products that they produce are causing addiction. And if you should then use the data to then contact individuals who have lost large amounts to offer them free bets and opportunities, I can’t see how anyone can say that they’re doing things that’s in the best interests of an individual.

So, to me, I feel the industry has to change in many ways, and I’m hoping that the review of the Gambling Act will lead to those changes that will at least reduce the amount of avoidable harm. It won’t stop it. But then again, you know, alcohol is still on sale. Some people will be harmed. Smoking is still allowed. There are some people being harmed. So, as I say, I’m not anti-gambling but to my mind, the way the business is run and the way it markets it and what it does needs to be changed to at least significantly reduce the current level of avoidable harm.

John #2

And when you hear now 5% of gamblers account for 60% of profit. And then if you look online, that 5% is nearly 90%. The business model that these companies are running on is just incredible. It shouldn’t be allowed and then they’re allowed to be responsible for their own messaging. Safer gambling, responsible gambling, what a load of nonsense that is. Anyone with a gambling disorder it makes no difference. Anyone who hasn’t got a gambling disorder doesn’t listen to it anyway.

Products have to be changed. It is immoral. It to me is unethical. It’s just not right.

There needs to be a complete public health awareness that’s made clear, just like tobacco laws of how dangerous this can be. There needs to be update in the gambling laws, which is currently under review and keeps getting disbanded. Basically, holding the industry responsible for the damage that they are causing and also, things like statutory levy to help fund the organizations without the influence of the industry, to raise awareness, educate, treat people, and support.

I think that the regulation’s such a big thing for me, because just knowing a wee bit about how they draw you in and how they keep you in. He says to me his niece was watching him. She’s five at the time, watching him paying slots… That’s scary because kids are so, they’re not daft, they’re not stupid, and they’re so impressionable.

How do you regulate now the number of companies now that there are, I know there’s the big ones, but there’s lots of smaller ones too. How do you regulate all of that now? It’s all out of the bag, isn’t it? I really think that something’s got to happen, you’ve got to do something, and you’ve got to start somewhere. I know a lot of it’s because of revenue as well, isn’t it? Because the government gets revenue from them in billions.

Financial risk checks

Many affected others say they want to see affordability checks put in place. They said gambling companies tell consumers not to spend more than they can afford. But they had seen how the companies encouraged them to spend and let them spend large amounts rapidly. Affordability checks would mean gambling companies have to check that people have the resources to afford their gambling without experiencing harm. Gambling companies already collect a lot of data about consumers and use this for marketing. They should use the data they collect to detect when people are in difficulty and to take action to stop the harm to them. Companies should share data to protect people, as people could be gambling across many different sites.

People can put blocks on things, but all you do is you just set up another account with somebody else. I’d love to see some more joined-up thinking in that respect of, “right, we’re really going to support people and they are at crisis point then”, because all they will do is go onto another platform… I don’t see why that couldn’t happen to at least minimize it a little bit because casino gambling and going into a betting shop is much more regulated, but the online world is just too accessible.

He didn’t have to verify. He’d memorized the number and didn’t have to do any verification at all. He just inputs the information. There needs to be more due diligence.

I see people talking a lot and I witnessed it first-hand of no affordability checks for putting money in, but getting money out then suddenly can become a problem. I think a thorough identification, some kind of ID system with affordability checks, and a centralized system of if someone actually has accounts across 25, 30 websites and they’re depositing what looks like an okay amount on one, but times that by 30, which was what he was doing.

There should be more restrictions. The difficult thing is what I’ve seen is things like when you want to self-exclude yourself from a gambling site so you can’t use it. They’ll ask you why, and then they’ll give you a chance to say how long you want to exclude for. They can see if somebody’s gambling too much. I know they do the whole when the Fun Stops Stop. When you’re a compulsive gambler, you don’t realize that it’s not fun anymore… If they realize that somebody’s gambling a lot, there should be something that flags up, and then they should be able to cut them off.

Minimum age

Some people want to see the minimum age to gamble raised. They say that 18 is too young for people to be able to start gambling. This is because young people are not mature enough and this makes their risk of harm higher. It is also when individuals may be in a period of life transition. For example, getting access to a student loan and being away from home for the first time, or starting paid employment.

The age should be increased to something like 25, when the brain is properly matured, and people can make the right decisions and not have student loans. Having £10,000 as I did as a London student from poor financial background, you get £10,000 you get given £10,000 that essentially people have gambled their student loan away, so it just doesn’t make sense for an 18 to 21 year old when they are very unlikely to have the sort of resources to be gambling, even if it’s £10 or £20 and we cannot really afford it, especially as a student if you don’t have an income.

I think people just think 18 is like a magical age where everything should just become and perhaps it should be for things like voting, where it should be encouraged, like maybe it should even be 16 because you start something young, you’re more likely to do it. And if it’s a good thing like voting, maybe if people start voting at 16, they’re more likely to do it when they’re older as well. But if you apply that principle to gambling or smoking or alcohol, would you really want them to be doing it more when they’re older and to be developing addictions?

One that I would like to see the age go up of 21 because the theory is that your brain develops at the age of 25 etc. But if it was 21 it would just make it more difficult for those university students at 18 going to uni and people starting work as well. And hopefully, as you get older, you may be less likely to take those risks. Maybe, maybe not. But when you take someone going to uni as an example, give them £3000 for them for their loan, never shown any interest in gambling and all of a sudden start university and in the first term, they spend all their money gambling then they drop out of university. You hear lots and lots of stories of that.

Get Support

If you feel like you need support or someone to talk to about your own or someone else’s gambling, there are several organisations who can offer help, support and answer any questions you may have.

Take Part

We are inviting people to share their experiences of any kind of difficulties due to gambling.