Leo Vegas
- Thread starter RespG40
- Start date
- Status
pausefisk
New member
RespG40
Member
Online casino goaded addict to gamble away £20,000 on sister site
LeoVegas under investigation for bombarding suspended user with marketing emails
The Gambling Commission is investigating claims that the online casino company LeoVegas accepted £20,000 from a problem gambler who had stolen the money from his mother, and then bombarded him with emails encouraging him to keep betting.
Details of the case, uncovered by the Guardian, sparked renewed calls from campaigners and politicians for gambling companies to perform more rigorous checks before customers place bets.
The recovering addict, who is receiving treatment but could still face prosecution, had his account locked by LeoVegas in May 2018 after a customer service employee flagged up “concerning” communication during a live webchat.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
The account was suspended days after LeoVegas received a £600,000 penalty from the Gambling Commission for separate incidents of accepting bets from problem gamblers.
Advertisement
Despite the suspension, sister companies in the LeoVegas group, including Pink Casino and Castle Jackpot, continued sending him marketing emails as often as four times in a day offering “free spins” and bonuses.
In January 2019, after months of receiving the emails, the gambler set up a new account with 21.co.uk, also part of the Leo Gaming group. He used the same name and email address but this time registered his mother’s debit card.
He proceeded to gamble away about £20,000 before 21.co.uk asked for ID verification and, on realising that he was using someone else’s card, eventually blocked his account.
Once again, though, sister companies in the Leo Gaming group resumed sending marketing emails from a host of its sites, offering free spins and refunds on losses.
As well as using his mother’s card without permission, the gambler had racked up thousands of pounds in debt from payday lenders including 247Moneybox, MyJar and Satsuma.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, who is pushing for tighter controls on online gambling, said: “It makes no sense for gambling companies to be doing ID and affordability checks after gamblers have lost huge sums rather than before they’ve placed the bets.
“The whole system seems the wrong way round. We also need to see immediate action to scrap credit card betting and end the practice of bombarding gambling addicts with gambling ads.”
A Gambling Commission spokesman said: “We are absolutely clear with operators about the rules that they must follow to prevent and protect their customers from experiencing harm from gambling. Where we see evidence that those rules are not being followed, we will investigate.”
The case comes as the government conducts a review of whether regulations covering online betting should be tightened, including through stronger ID checks and rules that prevent gamblers from placing bets on credit.
Online casinos and bookmakers are not currently required to check whether gamblers can afford their habit before allowing them to place bets.
The Gambling Commission is understood to have collected evidence relating to the case and is examining whether LeoVegas breached the conditions of its licence to operate in the UK. LeoVegas declined to comment.
In 2018 the Gambling Commission forced LeoVegas to pay a £600,000 penalty for a series of transgressions after a review of the company’s licence to operate in the UK.
The majority of the failings related to self-exclusion systems, which allow gamblers to bar themselves voluntarily from placing bets with a company. The regulator found that 1,894 LeoVegas customers were sent marketing material despite having signed up to its self-exclusion scheme.
More than 400 customers were allowed to bet £200,000 over two months, without the company speaking to them first or applying a 24-hour “cooling-off” period.
Gambling lowlights
April 2019 Bookies withdraw new games after they are accused of trying to bypass laws cutting stakes on fixed-odds betting terminals from £100 a spin to £2.
December 2018 Ladbrokes is revealed to have paid £1m to victims of a problem gambler who had stolen from them, in return for a pledge not to inform the industry regulator.
November 2018 Three online casinos pay out £14m in regulatory penalties over failures in money-laundering and problem gambling controls.
May 2018 Leo Vegas receives £600,000 penalty for accepting bets from problem gamblers and sending them marketing material.
March 2018 SkyBet hit with £1m penalty for allowing gamblers who had self-excluded to keep betting and sending them marketing material.
August 2017 Online casino 888 fined a record £7.8m for failures in its duty to protect more than 7,000 vulnerable customers.
LeoVegas under investigation for bombarding suspended user with marketing emails
The Gambling Commission is investigating claims that the online casino company LeoVegas accepted £20,000 from a problem gambler who had stolen the money from his mother, and then bombarded him with emails encouraging him to keep betting.
Details of the case, uncovered by the Guardian, sparked renewed calls from campaigners and politicians for gambling companies to perform more rigorous checks before customers place bets.
The recovering addict, who is receiving treatment but could still face prosecution, had his account locked by LeoVegas in May 2018 after a customer service employee flagged up “concerning” communication during a live webchat.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
The account was suspended days after LeoVegas received a £600,000 penalty from the Gambling Commission for separate incidents of accepting bets from problem gamblers.
Advertisement
Despite the suspension, sister companies in the LeoVegas group, including Pink Casino and Castle Jackpot, continued sending him marketing emails as often as four times in a day offering “free spins” and bonuses.
In January 2019, after months of receiving the emails, the gambler set up a new account with 21.co.uk, also part of the Leo Gaming group. He used the same name and email address but this time registered his mother’s debit card.
He proceeded to gamble away about £20,000 before 21.co.uk asked for ID verification and, on realising that he was using someone else’s card, eventually blocked his account.
Once again, though, sister companies in the Leo Gaming group resumed sending marketing emails from a host of its sites, offering free spins and refunds on losses.
As well as using his mother’s card without permission, the gambler had racked up thousands of pounds in debt from payday lenders including 247Moneybox, MyJar and Satsuma.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, who is pushing for tighter controls on online gambling, said: “It makes no sense for gambling companies to be doing ID and affordability checks after gamblers have lost huge sums rather than before they’ve placed the bets.
“The whole system seems the wrong way round. We also need to see immediate action to scrap credit card betting and end the practice of bombarding gambling addicts with gambling ads.”
A Gambling Commission spokesman said: “We are absolutely clear with operators about the rules that they must follow to prevent and protect their customers from experiencing harm from gambling. Where we see evidence that those rules are not being followed, we will investigate.”
The case comes as the government conducts a review of whether regulations covering online betting should be tightened, including through stronger ID checks and rules that prevent gamblers from placing bets on credit.
Online casinos and bookmakers are not currently required to check whether gamblers can afford their habit before allowing them to place bets.
The Gambling Commission is understood to have collected evidence relating to the case and is examining whether LeoVegas breached the conditions of its licence to operate in the UK. LeoVegas declined to comment.
In 2018 the Gambling Commission forced LeoVegas to pay a £600,000 penalty for a series of transgressions after a review of the company’s licence to operate in the UK.
The majority of the failings related to self-exclusion systems, which allow gamblers to bar themselves voluntarily from placing bets with a company. The regulator found that 1,894 LeoVegas customers were sent marketing material despite having signed up to its self-exclusion scheme.
More than 400 customers were allowed to bet £200,000 over two months, without the company speaking to them first or applying a 24-hour “cooling-off” period.
Gambling lowlights
April 2019 Bookies withdraw new games after they are accused of trying to bypass laws cutting stakes on fixed-odds betting terminals from £100 a spin to £2.
December 2018 Ladbrokes is revealed to have paid £1m to victims of a problem gambler who had stolen from them, in return for a pledge not to inform the industry regulator.
November 2018 Three online casinos pay out £14m in regulatory penalties over failures in money-laundering and problem gambling controls.
May 2018 Leo Vegas receives £600,000 penalty for accepting bets from problem gamblers and sending them marketing material.
March 2018 SkyBet hit with £1m penalty for allowing gamblers who had self-excluded to keep betting and sending them marketing material.
August 2017 Online casino 888 fined a record £7.8m for failures in its duty to protect more than 7,000 vulnerable customers.
Rexxor420
New member
"Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, who is pushing for tighter controls on online gambling, said: “It makes no sense for gambling companies to be doing ID and affordability checks after gamblers have lost huge sums rather than before they’ve placed the bets."
Yeah when the fuck do they start doing that? You can lose 20k without any questions but if you want to withdraw 100€ you have to send them 100 documents. And then people wonder why the government start regulating stuff they know nothing about, because people who know stuff don't give a fuck about their costumers. So you end up with no bonuses and 3 second spin rules.
Yeah when the fuck do they start doing that? You can lose 20k without any questions but if you want to withdraw 100€ you have to send them 100 documents. And then people wonder why the government start regulating stuff they know nothing about, because people who know stuff don't give a fuck about their costumers. So you end up with no bonuses and 3 second spin rules.
Last edited by a moderator:
RespG40
Member
RespG40
Member
Its from 10 days ago. This was yesterdays article.
Online casinos ignored my obvious signs of addiction, says gambler
A problem gambler who lost £125,000 with the online casinos LeoVegas and Casumo has accused them of ignoring obvious signs of her addiction, instead offering her bonuses to keep betting.
Katie, 42, formerly a successful accountant, has been receiving addiction treatment after racking up debts on nine credit cards.
Her losses include one of £54,000 in an overnight spree when she was allowed to place bets of more than £380,000 on one website in a single session.
Details of her case, thought to be the subject of an inquiry by the Gambling Commission, have emerged as calls are made for tougher regulation of online gambling and a review of whether betting on credit should be allowed.
Detailed evidence seen by the Guardian indicates Katie consistently displayed behaviours the commission said should alert betting companies to problem gambling. These include making dozens of failed deposits – where her banks refused to let her place bets – and cancelling the withdrawal of winnings at the last minute to plough money back into casino games.
In each case, she was made a VIP customer without being subjected to affordability checks, and was showered with “free spins”.
Casumo offered her free tickets to events at Wembley Arena, even as she gambled away the proceeds of her high-level accounting job.
According to internal communications among Casumo staff, an employee called her a “prick” after she later complained the company had not stepped in earlier.
Katie recounted her case on My Name Is…, a BBC Radio 4 documentary series that follows someone at the heart of a current news story.
Betting records show Katie, not her real name, began gambling with Casumo in June 2017, mostly placing bets of about £100. On 9 October 2017, she made dozens of wagers of up to £5,000 throughout the night, receiving three bonus offers even as she lost control.
Casumo records show the company only noticed her unusual betting behaviour nearly 11 hours after the spree began, sending her an email inquiring about it. She gambled a further £7,000 after that and Casumo failed to block her account until mid-afternoon, after she emailed a customer representative saying she felt “suicidal”.
In a later email to Katie, the company said: “You are right to point out that there were a number of factors which could have been considered to be red flags of problem gambling. However, we look at the account holistically and within the context of the given customer.”
Later that year, Katie again lost control, this time with LeoVegas, a Swedish company that has established a foothold in the UK online casino market and is a shirt sponsor for Norwich City and Brentford football clubs.
The company gave her VIP status and allowed her to keep betting using multiple credit cards, despite 291 failed deposit attempts and the cancellation of withdrawals worth £27,550.
Between 12 and 13 December 2017, she placed £382,844 of bets in a 24-hour non-stop session, losing £53,985 on a slot machine game.
On 3 January 2018, by which time she had placed more than £1m of bets and lost £94,049, an employee emailed her to say: “I hope you had a lovely Christmas and a great start to the new year!
“Just wanted to send you a quick message to let you know that I have added a special £800 loyalty bonus to your account that comes with only 1x wagering requirement. Wishing you a lovely day ahead!”
Katie said LeoVegas had not acknowledged any failing in its problem gambling controls, but had paid £34,000 towards her rehabilitation instead as a “gesture of goodwill”.
She said she had been stunned by how the companies missed warning signs of addiction, including an escalation in the scale and frequency of her bets, as well as the use of multiple credit cards, her failed deposits and cancelled withdrawals.
“They have algorithms where if you’re spending a lot they make you a VIP, or send you a bonus email and they use that to their advantage. They could also use it to prevent problem gambling, which is what the commission say they should be doing,” she said.
The commission said it could not comment on individual cases.
Both LeoVegas and Casumo have previously faced regulatory penalties for failing to protect problem gamblers.
The Guardian this month revealed fresh claims that LeoVegas accepted £20,000 from a problem gambler who had stolen the money from his mother, and then bombarded him with promotional offers.
LeoVegas said it could not comment on Katie’s case but said it “takes safer gambling very seriously, and follows strict policies and procedures to ensure compliance with our legal obligations and our licence conditions”.
Casumo said it could not comment on Katie’s case but insisted some of the details were “incorrect”.
- My Name Is Katie was broadcast at 8pm on BBC Radio 4, and will be available to listen again on the BBC Sounds app.
BoracicLint
New member
This makes sense to me. He seems to be saying that verification needs to be done before depositing rather than after a customer has lost loads.
Roedgaard72
Member
What you are allowed to is to have an objective opinion and not being biased against LeoVegas. Are you continuing the thread from CM and what is your motive? Did you actually listen to the radio doc about "Katie"? Taking drugs and gambling irresponsible and now want the money back she lost. Come on! seriously. So if people play a- ÉV game (she is suppose to be an accountant), they can just blame it on the casinos and funny they know exactly what media to go to for a subjective view.
Didn`t they pay 34k for her treatment or something? Another addict not taking resposibility for own action!
RespG40
Member
My motive would be against companies who allow problem gamblers to waste obscene amounts of money with no interaction. You then have the ones who ignore exclusions, do not carry out proper verifications until a withdrawal is made etc etc. Leo Vegas and a further 5 operators are currently under investigation by the UKGC for "not operating in the spirit of their licence conditions". It should be highlighted to all. This case, and the one above, were two examples. These do not appear to be isolated incidents though.
- Status
