We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Journalist Wanted - Gambling Commission Complaint
Comments
-
Oh, of course.bobajob_1966 wrote: »Plus even if they had that knowledge, there would be a fine line between helping someone who may have a problem, and restricting the freedom of the individual to use his money as he wishes.
Not to mention the disability discrimination issues ...
0 -
michael1983l wrote: »I am not naive enough to think it will be banned but I do believe tighter, more clear regulation could be introduced.
How though? Based on what? The amount they're spending?
That is not reliable. Someone might only make a £1 bet a week because thats all they can afford. Someone else might be loaded and be able to afford £10,000 a week.
Likewise, if you get a big payout of thousands, its within your means to spend hundreds per day.
I'd agree with a previous poster that if they were acting aggressively when losing, that is cause for concern. Its kind of like anti-piracy techniques. They'll keep making new ways to try and stop people doing it, and people will keep making new ways to get around it!
As someone said early on, nothing to stop the gambling addict going from one shop to the next. Or, if that fails, betting online or asking someone else to go and place bets on their behalf!You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
The OP answered your question earlier...unholyangel wrote: »How though? Based on what? The amount they're spending?
That is not reliable. Someone might only make a £1 bet a week because thats all they can afford. Someone else might be loaded and be able to afford £10,000 a week.
Likewise, if you get a big payout of thousands, its within your means to spend hundreds per day.
Clearly the OP would like the maximum bet, in your example, to be £1.00 a week.michael1983l wrote: »
No it shouldn't vary, the levels should be set at a value that protects everybody in society not just a few like it does now. The maximum accpepted levels of betting should be set at the maximum level of affordability for the lowest ecconomic level of society.tomwakefield wrote: »Wouldn't this vary from person to person, depending on their finances? If I was on £1,000,000 a year, I might view gambling £100 a day differently to someone else who was on £20,000 a year and it is more likely to be indicative of a problem in the latter case.
Although he now denies it, the OP is effectively lobbying for a ban on gambling.0 -
But 'the rules' say they need to have cause for concern.
Without knowing the bank balances of every punter (amongst other things), 'the rules' are flawed.
To get 'the rules' changed perhaps you need to get the attention of your Member of Parliament.
I have now written to my local MP. The rules are falwed like you mentioned and could be cleared up at minimum. At best like you say gambling could be banned but I suspect many would disagree with that. I would settle for regulations that actually hold some weight rather than the meaningless ones in force now. They are simply not worth the paper they are written on.0 -
The OP answered your question earlier...
Clearly the OP would like the maximum bet, in your example, to be £1.00 a week.
Although he now denies it, the OP is effectively lobbying for a ban on gambling.
I thought "for the greater good" was supposed to be a small scrafice that would benefit many as opposed to complete oppression to benefit a few?You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
michael1983l wrote: »I have now written to my local MP. The rules are falwed like you mentioned and could be cleared up at minimum. At best like you say gambling could be banned but I suspect many would disagree with that. I would settle for regulations that actually hold some weight rather than the meaningless ones in force now. They are simply not worth the paper they are written on.
You do understand the difference between regulations and code of practice right?You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
unholyangel wrote: »You do understand the difference between regulations and code of practice right?
Regulations are rules set out by a regulator normally in terms of a specific sector or industry. A code of practice is a set of rules. Same meat different gravy no?0 -
michael1983l wrote: »Regulations are rules set out by a regulator normally in terms of a specific sector or industry. A code of practice is a set of rules. Same meat different gravy no?
CoP is how they should be done.
Regulations are how they must be done
Much like how a EU Directive is not law but an EU regulation is.You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
bobajob_1966 wrote: »I have asked you countless times how they should spot someone with a problem. You have failed to provide a workable answer.
Well we've been told to look out to see for any of the customers trying to borrow money off other customers and watching to see if customers are getting agitated when other customers are playing the machines.
We've been told that the amounts spent are not a good indication of whether a person has a gambling problem or not as we don't know each customer's financial details
As far as the Op is concerned - are you seriously expecting us to believe that you could gamble this amount of money and no-one (in your family) raised a concern with you?2014 Target;
To overpay CC by £1,000.
Overpayment to date : £310
2nd Purse Challenge:
£15.88 saved to date0 -
michael1983l wrote: »Regulations are rules set out by a regulator normally in terms of a specific sector or industry. A code of practice is a set of rules. Same meat different gravy no?
A CoP is not a set of rules per se, they are good practice, nothing more. Furthermore they are not legislation, which you quoted them to be earlier.
Have you discussed any of this little crusade with your medical team?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards