Latest News
Majority of gamblers hit with affordability checks have handed over info, but wider betting population unwilling
- Most bettors asked to undergo financial checks agree
- Higher spending players more willing than lower spenders
- Most who’ve not yet faced affordability checks say they will refuse
The majority of bettors who have been asked for proof they can afford to gamble have provided it, but there are big questions over how things will play out if checks become mandatory or more common, the results of a new study by sports betting community OLBG show.
A survey of bettors carried out online by YouGov for OLBG found that the majority of those who had been asked by gambling operators to provide documents such as payslips, bank statements or other documents had complied with the request.
The survey, which polled 1,007 bettors, found that 21.8% of bettors had already been asked for documents by at least one bookmaker. Of these, 74.3% had provided them, but 17.9% had refused and started playing with a different licensed operator instead. Of the remainder, 4.1% refused and moved to an unlicensed operator, while 3.7% stopped betting entirely.
The willingness to provide documentation was less widespread among those who had not yet been asked to do so, however.
Of the 78.2% of punters who had not yet faced affordability checks, 37.3% said they would refuse and simply stop betting, 35.0% said they would move to a different licensed operator and 4.1% said they’d go to an unlicensed company. Only 23.5% indicated they would be willing to provide the documents.
“Most bettors who have been asked to provide documents have done so. More importantly, very few of those who were asked stopped gambling or went to the black market, the latter being the worst unintended consequence of measures aimed at making gambling more responsible,” said Richard Moffat, CEO at OLBG.
“However, there is a stark difference between those who have been asked and those who haven’t in terms of willingness.”
As the below table shows, overall 65% of bettors reported not being willing to comply with affordability checks. Those betting lower monthly amounts were the least open to handing over financial documents, with more than three in four (75.4%) of those betting less than £5 a month and 72% of those betting £6-15 a month unwilling to undergo affordability checks.
“Few people who are spending at this level are likely to think it is proportionate for a bookie to ask for proof they can afford it and it’s quite surprising how many lower spending players report already having been asked. From the rumours about what level mandatory checks might come in, it seems unlikely checks will be forced on players at levels under £100 per month,” said Moffat.
Players spending less than £100 per month
| Have you been asked by a gambling company to provide payslips, bank statements or similar documents as part of an affordability or proof of funds check? | All bettors | Less than £5 | £6-15 | £16-25 | £26-50 | £51-100 |
| Unweighted base | 1,007 | 235 | 224 | 147 | 154 | 93 |
| Yes, I have and I provided the required documents | 16.16% | 6.00% | 10.08% | 20.86% | 16.55% | 14.27% |
| No, I have not but I would provide the documents if asked | 18.45% | 18.20% | 18.06% | 23.14% | 20.31% | 21.62% |
| Yes, I have, but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different licensed company instead | 3.92% | 0.40% | 1.77% | 4.22% | 4.53% | 6.57% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different unlicensed company instead | 0.90% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.71% | 1.29% | 1.08% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and stopped betting | 0.79% | 0.00% | 0.43% | 0.70% | 1.94% | 1.10% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with a different licensed company instead | 27.40% | 20.40% | 31.52% | 24.80% | 35.25% | 38.36% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with an unlicensed company instead | 3.20% | 1.30% | 3.57% | 4.17% | 3.27% | 1.11% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t bet | 29.18% | 53.60% | 34.10% | 21.40% | 16.86% | 15.88% |
| Total willing to provide documents | 34.61% | 24.20% | 28.14% | 44.00% | 36.86% | 35.89% |
| Total unwilling to provide documents | 65.39% | 75.70% | 71.86% | 56.00% | 63.14% | 64.10% |
Players spending more than £100 per month
| Have you been asked by a gambling company to provide payslips, bank statements or similar documents as part of an affordability or proof of funds check? | All bettors | £101-200 | £201-300 | £301-500 | £501-1000 |
| Unweighted Base | 1,007 | 57 | 16 | 16 | 20 |
| Yes, I have and I provided the required documents | 16.16% | 30.04% | 31.87% | 50.63% | 40.65% |
| No, I have not but I would provide the documents if asked | 18.45% | 19.41% | 12.94% | 0.00% | 4.79% |
| Yes, I have, but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different licensed company instead | 3.92% | 12.40% | 6.73% | 0.00% | 15.35% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different unlicensed company instead | 0.90% | 1.77% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and stopped betting | 0.79% | 1.70% | 0.00% | 6.45% | 0.00% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with a different licensed company instead | 27.40% | 24.19% | 36.36% | 30.49% | 28.90% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with an unlicensed company instead | 3.20% | 5.19% | 12.10% | 6.45% | 5.12% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t bet | 29.18% | 5.31% | 0.00% | 5.98% | 5.20% |
| Total willing to provide documents | 34.61% | 49.45% | 44.81% | 50.63% | 45.44% |
| Total unwilling to provide documents | 65.39% | 50.56% | 55.19% | 49.37% | 54.57% |
* Players spending more than £1,000 per month were excluded as numbers were too small to be statistically significant.
However, while willingness to undergo affordability checks does seem to increase among players who spend more on a monthly basis, even among those spending £100-plus per month, less than half were open to affordability checks.
One big difference between players at lower spend levels and those spending more than £100 was the likelihood of players stopping gambling if asked to undergo checks. While 53.6% of those betting less than £5 said they wouldn’t gamble if faced with affordability checks, just 5.31% said the same in the £101-200 per month category.
Higher spending players were more likely to have moved to a different licensed company rather than provide documents, but across all spending amounts a significant proportion of players reported plans to do so if asked to provide documents.
“Many players reported either having already moved to a different licensed operator or being willing to do so over affordability checks. Therefore, there is now a big question mark over what might happen if affordability checks become mandatory and all licensed operators have to impose them at certain levels,” said Moffat.
The survey also found that younger players were more willing to submit to financial checks. About one-third (33.34%) of those aged 18-24 said they had been asked for and provided documents, while 22.86% said they hadn’t been asked but would do so. In the 55-plus age group, the percentage of players reporting the same fell to 6.40% and 15.37%, respectively.
More details on this breakdown can be found in the full survey report, along with various other findings on the UK’s gambling habits.
Powered by WPeMatico