All Categories› Poker Chat

You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Good or bad for online poker?

safc71safc71 Member Posts: 1,541
in Poker Chat
Gambling Commission could introduce £100 a month limits on losing accounts. If i have read this correctly from the Racing Post Online sites would have to ask permission to see your bank statements to make sure you can afford any loss over the month.

To me this could be very bad for online poker if a player hits a bad spell which we all do does this mean that it's no poker for the month or account investigated / closed ?.



Accounts closed and punters frustrated as affordability checks ...www.racingpost.com › news › accounts-closed-and-pu...
· Share on Twitter

Comments

  • 68Trebor68Trebor Member Posts: 1,943
    GG poker already doing this.
    Maximum of £200 a month deposit unless you provide loads of proof of earnings etc.
    Like you say it could see a significant drop in players long term.
    · Share on Twitter
  • tai-gartai-gar Member Posts: 2,586
    Once again you can gamble away as much as you want on the stock exchange but the GOVERNMENT wants to restrict gambling on gambling sites and in betting shops.

    They really don't understand the problem.
    · Share on Twitter
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,123
    I think this can only be applied to credit accounts. If you have deposited on a site then you have already funded it and cant lose more than your deposits. Exchanges should have an automatic safeguard that limits your liability to your available funds and on gaming sites you cant lose more than your account total.

    If it is applied to deposits then sites will surely go back to e wallets or even pay point or pay zone as methods of sidestepping this.

    Is this because of all the people who over committed to F I I wonder and stories of losing everything are once again rampant and yet it's ok to spend your last penny on scratch cards.

    Honestly, I see the devastation that gambling can cause, along with alcohol, drugs and abuse but here's the thing.

    You cannot legislate against it, stupidity isn't a crime, addiction isn't illegal and you can't stop people from self destruction.

    It is totally immoral to say to people we don't think you have the income to gamble, but please take advantage of these great interest rates to purchase a new house, a better car, a fitted kitchen/bathroom etc. Oh and credit, credit, credit ooops, now you're f'k'd.
    · Share on Twitter
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,527
    Good news for this. A news article on the Telegraph, which is behind a paywall, says that the income checks won't be happening. Tidbits from the article:

    The most stringent elements of a crackdown on the betting industry are set to be shelved as ministers fold plans for affordability checks into a wider review of the gambling laws. The ­Gambling Commission will be stripped of the power to force punters to submit work payslips before they are allowed to place a bet, industry sources said.

    Insiders expect the move will lead to affordability checks being either watered down or shelved completely.

    The Gambling Commission issued separate proposals including plans to impose mandatory affordability checks for customers who lose £100 or more a month. Operators said that such restrictions would have a devastating impact on earnings and warned they could push punters towards unregulated or unlicensed betting firms.

    · Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.