Three casinos licensed by the UK Gambling Commission received fines in October

Another portion of fines from UKGC, from 94 thousand to casino no verification withdrawal australia2 million For the umpteenth time, the UK Gambling Commission confirms its reputation as one of the strictest regulators. Recently it became known about new fines for three operators. The problem is the same everywhere, but the amounts are very different, depending on the damage caused. Paddy Power Betfair - 2.2 million The largest fine was issued by Paddy Power Betfair %s... They will have to pay 2.2 million pounds. Their fault is that they allowed the game with stolen money in 2016 and ignored the obvious signs of gambling addiction. One of the addicted gamblers has been stealing from his employer, Birmingham Dogs Home, for a long time. As a result, the amount was 900,000 pounds. There were other problem punters who should have been identified and banned from playing. UK Gambling Commission Rates 1.7 Million To Accelerate Development Of National Responsible Gambling Strategy %s... Nearly 500,000 will return to Birmingham Dogs Home and 50,000 will cover the UKGC's investigation costs. Mark Jarvis - 94,000 The regulator announced its Paddy Power decision on October 16th. A day earlier, he announced a fine of 94 thousand pounds to the independent bookmaker Mark Jarvis, which also did not react to the obvious signs of gambling addiction. And in this case, the punter also stole money from the employer. This time £ 11,250. This money will be returned to the employer. The money that the punter spent on the game, 22,660 pounds, will also return. Plus £ 60,000 for National Responsible Gambling Strategy and £ 4,000 for regulator


... On this topic Ludomania in online casinos. How to quit pokies? The problem of theft among gamblers is probably really widespread. Only recently, for example, did we discuss a case where a nurse stole $ 350,000 from an employer. Rank Group - £ 500,000 On October 10, Rank Group was fined £ 500,000. The reason is the same, the problem punter was not verification casino australia But here also the casino contacted the punter during the self-exclusion period. It turns out that especially large casino punters are visited. After activating self-exclusion, the general manager of the casino

visited the punter's home

... As a result of the conversation, a request was received from this manager to restore the punter's account. But the casino refused to do so. The casino also issued a loan to the punter. At some point, the punter lost 1 million pounds on credit in 24 hours. After this loss, the punter began to bet even more aggressively, so this frightened the casino itself, and they stopped it. Then they, most likely, contacted the regulator. The regulator said that the penalty would have been much higher if the casino had not come by itself and told about its mistakes. They also actively helped the investigation of %s... The money will go to the Gamble Aware organization. The UKGC also noted that no matter how rich the punters are, they too can have problems and need to be attentive to them.