Two-Thirds of UK Bettors Oppose Stricter Affordability Checks

Two-Thirds of UK Bettors Oppose Stricter Affordability Checks – Survey Highlights Risk of Customer Shift to Unregulated Market

Key Takeaways

• 65% of UK bettors would refuse to provide bank statements or payslips to continue betting, according to a YouGov poll commissioned by the Betting and Gaming Council.
• Earlier data obtained via a Freedom of Information request showed 77% of respondents opposed financial risk checks.
• The Gambling Commission launched a financial risk check in summer 2024 based on players’ monthly net deposits.
• The British Horseracing Authority warned in an open letter that strict checks could harm racing’s funding model.
• The Betting and Gaming Council estimates up to £60 million was wagered with unregulated operators during the Cheltenham Festival.

YouGov Poll Shows Strong Resistance to Document-Based Financial Checks

A recent YouGov survey commissioned by the Betting and Gaming Council, an industry body representing regulated betting and gaming operators, found that 65% of UK bettors would refuse to provide personal financial documents if required to continue gambling. The documents referenced include bank statements and payslips as part of enhanced affordability or financial risk checks.

The findings were published amid ongoing debate over the implementation of stricter affordability controls by the UK Gambling Commission. According to the survey results, a majority of respondents expressed reluctance to share sensitive financial information with gambling operators.

The Betting and Gaming Council stated that this level of resistance could result in significant customer attrition from the regulated market if mandatory document-based checks are enforced. The organization argues that the practical impact of these requirements may be greater than policymakers anticipate.

Earlier Research Also Indicated Widespread Opposition

The new polling data follows earlier research obtained by the Betting and Gaming Council from the Gambling Commission through a Freedom of Information request. That previous survey included more than 12,000 respondents and found that 77% opposed financial risk checks.

Among frequent bettors, only 14% indicated they would be willing to provide financial details as part of such checks. The Betting and Gaming Council has pointed to these figures as further evidence that mandatory financial document requirements could affect a substantial portion of active customers.

In addition to customer resistance, the Council has highlighted operational concerns identified during early trials of financial vulnerability checks. These included inconsistent or unclear data, ambiguous outcomes for customers, and increased friction in the customer journey.

Regulatory Background: Financial Risk Checks Introduced in 2024

The Gambling Commission launched a financial risk check in summer 2024. The system is based on players’ monthly net deposits and forms part of broader efforts to address gambling related harm.

The introduction of these checks has been controversial within the industry. More than 100,000 people signed a petition against the measures in 2024, triggering a Westminster Hall debate. During that debate, then minister Stuart Andrew MP stated that checks would only be introduced if they were “truly frictionless.”

Grainne Hurst, chief executive of the Betting and Gaming Council, said that requiring customers to submit bank statements would contradict earlier assurances that checks would be frictionless. She stated that forcing customers to provide sensitive financial information could drive them toward unregulated operators, where consumer safeguards do not apply.

The Council maintains that most customers bet safely and within their means and argues that regulatory measures should focus on protecting vulnerable individuals rather than introducing broad requirements affecting the wider customer base.

British Horseracing Authority Warns of Impact on Racing Funding

Concerns about affordability checks extend beyond betting operators. The British Horseracing Authority has signed an open letter addressed to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, warning that overly stringent financial risk checks could have unintended consequences for the sport.

The letter cautioned that intrusive affordability measures may deter regular bettors, which could in turn affect racing’s funding model. The Authority described the proposed checks as an unprecedented state intrusion into people’s private lives and stated that millions of racing supporters have been dismayed by the approach.

Horse racing in the UK relies heavily on betting related revenues. As a result, any reduction in regulated betting activity could have financial implications for the sport.

Industry Raises Concerns About Growth of Unregulated Market

The Betting and Gaming Council has increasingly highlighted what it describes as the risk of customers migrating to the illegal gambling market if regulatory requirements become too restrictive. According to the Council’s estimates, as much as £60 million was wagered with unregulated operators during the Cheltenham Festival.

The Council argues that unregulated operators do not provide the same consumer protections as licensed UK platforms. It has warned that stricter affordability checks could unintentionally accelerate the growth of this segment if customers choose to avoid document-based verification processes.

The debate reflects a broader tension between regulatory objectives aimed at reducing gambling related harm and industry concerns about market competitiveness and channelization into the regulated sector.

Our Assessment

The latest YouGov poll indicates that a majority of UK bettors are unwilling to provide personal financial documents as part of affordability checks. Combined with earlier survey data and public opposition reflected in a petition and parliamentary debate, the findings show sustained resistance to document-based financial risk assessments.

The Gambling Commission’s financial risk check, introduced in 2024 and based on monthly net deposits, remains a central point of contention. Industry representatives and the British Horseracing Authority have warned that strict implementation could affect customer retention and betting related revenues, while also raising concerns about potential migration to unregulated operators. For regulated betting platforms and their users, the outcome of this policy debate may influence verification requirements and market dynamics in the UK.