Gambling ombudsman

[You See]

I listened to radio 4 yesterday for an hour about the new suggested ombudsman for gambling , which although is probrably needed why do the government only include the bookies for input . This should be independant from the off . It was daunting to hear from problem gamblers who were re inbursed by crookies who returned money on the condition it was not there fault . Whilst i beleive if you take the bet on you are responsible and need to be willing to lose . There will always be people chasing there tales . Should these people be intitled to there money back ? In my opinion no but i feel there needs to be reform and an independant ombudsman away from the bookies sounds ok , but the bookies seem to have all the odds stacked in there favour and they constantly use there wealth of tax paying to bully the government.
There is another section on it today on 4 if anyone is interested , and i would say yesterdays is probrably available to listen to .

 

[NassauBoard]

Thanks for flagging up. The calls with William Hill are haunting, but I agree with you that it should be up to the punter to be responsible. The thing I would like to see is true "responsible gambling" account settings, whereby people can only deposit money that they have and you should have to set daily, weekly and monthly loss limits, that are proportionate.

The promise of an ombudsman is good, it should keep bookmakers "honest", but lets face it, the ombudsman will probably have few teeth and lobbying will reduce the impact of the ombudsman anyway.

 

[OddDog]

I’d simply put a 1 month ban on all forms of betting. 99% of punters would realize they are happier without it

A bit like Movember or fasting for lent. Compensate the loss of tax income by tripling the tax on booze and smokes. Dozy twats will still pay it

 

[You See]

I’d simply put a 1 month ban on all forms of betting. 99% of punters would realize they are happier without it

A bit like Movember or fasting for lent. Compensate the loss of tax income by tripling the tax on booze and smokes. Dozy twats will still pay it

If only life was that simple.
Peaks and troughs was a word used by a reformed addict , swings and roundabouts is the term i would use ,either way you need to be regimented in your approach to what you bet on, stake size etc i use many views on my betting i also use many accounts , like a few i have been sent a check through the post saying your custom is no longer welcome . Which was another interesting case being heard in the courts in Australia rejecting customers who are very good at winning . The bookmakers spokesman was very shrewd and would not admit they did not like winners and said they only banned customers with insider information or abusing special offers . The judge was fantastic in roasting him . If i get 5 i will try to find a link .
Either way it is a self regulated buisness that really does do what it wants . But to use the word addict and refund is wrong a heroin addict or crack head would get shot if they complained to a dealer for a 5 year refund because it was the dealers fault they were doing it .

 

[Saf]

People need to take responsibility and no they shouldn’t be able to claim any money back from the bookies because they’ve suffered big losses chasing their money. They wouldn’t hand some of their profits back because they bet more than they could afford.

We need to accept they’ll always be problem gamblers, the same as problem drinkers, drug users etc. Let us not forget the vast majority of folk bet without putting themselves into financial difficulty. I’m not sure what the answer is but blanket covering every punter isn’t the right way to go.

I’ve been gambling over 20 years. I love it. It’s a part of life that I really enjoy. Never put myself in financial difficulty through it and I’m concerned about the potential changes/restrictions that are coming in. After all this time what right does anybody have to tell me how much I can or can’t gamble? It won’t stop anything, if people want to gamble they’ll just jump between different shops, ask people to put bets on for them or go to the racecourse where the bookies will accept any amount you want to stake. It could also see the emergence of black market bookies which many no doubt will be run by criminal gangs. The knock on effect that could have on people and families is very worrying, tbh.

When the racing is on place your bets for the day through a shop or online and then go home and put your phone away until it’s finished. Once you stay in a shop betting race by race or pull your phone out for the same reason, it’s never going to end well.

Old school is the best way and only way for many people to gamble within their means.

 

[Chaninbar]

Agree largely with the personal responsibility argument but you should never be able to gamble using funds from a credit card. That’s madness.

 

[Ron]

I find it very difficult to provide a balanced view on this topic because if people would just budget there wouldn't be this problem. Things like food, clothing, mortgage/rent, insurance, taxes etc are all things that have to be paid and, after taking out all the essential costs, if there is anything left (disposable income), what people do with it is up to them. Millions of people do the lotteries, maybe several times a week, with virtually no chance of winning. Some go out for meals and/or go to theatre/cinemas. Some join keep fit clubs or other clubs, some attend football matches every week; and it goes on. I'm not aware of any organisation monitoring their expenditure, whether paid for by debit or credit card. If some people chose to get their enjoyment by betting on horses and watching their selections (for which they may even get a return) that is up to them. If people spend more than they can afford, whatever it may be on, then that is just irresponsible

It would be interesting to know how many people are in debt through irresponsible use of credit cards on non betting related purchases as opposed to those in debt through irresponsible gambling. I am not against the use of credit card in order to gain earlier benefit and taking advantage of offers, provided it makes financial sense and the payments are affordable. More in favour of interest free, pay in 10 instalments when bargain offers are available to be honest

The only solution I believe in is for people to be responsible for how they spend their money. If they have family and are too selfish to control their outgoings then I feel sorry for the family and maybe support and guidance for the sufferers could be made available. I think more education on financial management should be in the school curriculum

Bookmakers are not the ones that should be controlling personal expenditure; individuals are

Maybe availability of credit in general should be more stringent

 

[Arthurol]

It's interesting to hear about the proposed changes, and I can understand the need for an independent body to oversee gambling regulations. It's unfortunate that the bookies seem to have a stronghold on the industry, and it's essential to have input from all stakeholders to ensure fair and balanced decisions. But I've heard that such companies can be relevant in such matters https://www.turkcasino.net. You might be interested in looking at it as an example. As for problem gamblers being reimbursed by crooked bookies, it's a tough call. While I agree that people should be responsible for their bets, some may argue that these individuals need help rather than punishment.