Affordability check failures

The duty in plain English

UK-licensed bookmakers cannot lawfully take money from customers who cannot afford to lose it. The Gambling Commission's framework is unambiguous: where a customer's deposit or loss pattern crosses risk thresholds, the operator must obtain — and verify — evidence that the spending is sustainable. That duty does not depend on the customer asking for help. It is a positive obligation triggered by the operator's own data.

How affordability checks actually work

A compliant affordability journey runs through four escalating stages: soft enquiry (open-source data, declared income, ONS expenditure benchmarking); documentary verification (payslips, bank statements, P60s, employment confirmation); source-of-funds (for higher-loss customers, evidence of where deposited funds specifically came from); and senior management review (for the highest-loss customer journeys, including any VIP arrangements). Where the operator skipped stages — or treated them as box-ticking exercises — the regulatory failure is clear.

The most common operator failures

Accepting implausible income claims

A customer depositing £20,000/month who declares £30,000/year income is mathematically impossible to be servicing those deposits affordably. Operators that took the £20,000 anyway, on the basis of an unverified self-declaration, have almost always breached duty.

Ignoring deposit escalation

A doubling, then tripling, then quintupling of deposit cadence over a few months is a textbook harm marker. Operators are required to act. When they don't, every subsequent loss sits on the operator's side of the ledger.

Permitting credit-card deposits (pre-2020)

Before the April 2020 ban, credit-card-funded gambling was a clear indicator of unaffordable spending. Operators that accepted those deposits without affordability follow-up are exposed.

Failing to follow up on documentary requests

Operators that issued a request, didn't receive evidence, and let the account continue to deposit anyway have failed the most basic affordability obligation.

Calculating recoverable losses

We work in three steps: identify the trigger date (the date by which the operator should reasonably have intervened); calculate net deposited losses (total deposits minus total withdrawals from the trigger date forward); apply interest (typically compounded) and add general and special damages. See recovering deposited losses.

The US position

US sportsbooks operate under state-by-state rules. Most regulated states impose meaningful affordability or "responsible gaming" obligations on operators including DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM and Caesars. The substantive duty — to identify customers spending beyond plausible means and intervene — is broadly equivalent.

What to do today

Take our 60-second free claim check. If you are in crisis, please call Samaritans 116 123 (UK) or 988 (US).