A recent YouGov poll commissioned by the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) has revealed that 65% of UK bettors would refuse to provide personal financial documents, such as bank statements or payslips, if required in order to continue betting.
The findings have intensified concerns within the betting industry that proposed affordability checks could drive customers away from regulated operators and into the illegal gambling market.
Strong reluctance to share
The YouGov survey, published by the BGC on Wednesday, indicated a strong reluctance among bettors to share sensitive financial information as part of enhanced verification processes. This unwillingness risks significant customer attrition from the regulated sector if the Gambling Commission enforces mandatory document-based financial risk checks.
The results echoed previous data obtained by the BGC from a Gambling Commission survey via a Freedom of Information request. That earlier research showed 77% of over 12,000 respondents opposed financial risk checks. Only 14% of frequent bettors were willing to provide financial details.
The BGC suggested these figures collectively signal that mandatory financial document checks may have a more profound effect on customers than regulators anticipate.
Several issues were flagged by the BGC during early trials of financial vulnerability checks procedures. This included inconsistent or unclear data, ambiguous outcomes for customers and increased friction in the customer journey.
Banking data sharing isn’t ‘frictionless’
“Ministers promised punters frictionless checks, but the Gambling Commission risks pushing ahead with the exact opposite,” said Grainne Hurst, chief executive of the Betting and Gaming Council.
“Forcing punters to hand over bank statements isn’t ‘frictionless’, it’s intrusive and will drive customers to the illegal market, where there are no safeguards at all.
“This poll sends a clear message from punters. A majority (65%) are unwilling to provide this kind of sensitive financial information. The reality is that number could be even higher when these checks are rolled out in practice.
“These proposals will push customers away from the regulated sector and towards the harmful, illegal black market, undermining the very protections these checks are supposed to deliver.
“The overwhelming majority of customers bet safely and within their means. We should be focusing on protecting the vulnerable, not placing unnecessary hurdles in front of millions of ordinary punters.
“Getting this balance wrong won’t just damage customer trust, it will put people at greater risk and further fuel the growth of the illegal market.”
Over 100,000 signed a petition against the checks in 2024, triggering a Westminster Hall debate at which then-minister Stuart Andrew MP said the checks would only be introduced if they were “truly frictionless”.
Concerns across the industry
These concerns were echoed more broadly across the racing sector. In an open letter addressed to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, the British Horseracing Authority warned that overly stringent financial risk checks could have unintended consequences for the sport.
The letter cautioned that intrusive affordability measures risked deterring regular bettors and would ultimately impact racing’s funding model.
“This unprecedented state intrusion into people’s private lives has dismayed the millions of people who love horse racing.”
The BGC has increasingly spoken out about the risks of unregulated gaming. They estimate that as much as £60 million was wagered with unregulated operators during the Cheltenham Festival.
Kathryn Evans
Kathryn covers bitesize breaking news with a primary focus on EMEA and US legislation. A proud North Walian, fluent Welsh speaker and lifelong Wrexham FC fan – long before Hollywood came calling.
