Cookies on the Gambling Commission website

The Gambling Commission website uses cookies to make the site work better for you. Some of these cookies are essential to how the site functions and others are optional. Optional cookies help us remember your settings, measure your use of the site and personalise how we communicate with you. Any data collected is anonymised and we do not set optional cookies unless you consent.

Set cookie preferences

You've accepted all cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Skip to main content
Back to full FOI list

Regulatory Returns

Request

I would like to obtain data from the Regulatory Returns for the following operator: Bet365

I am seeking the number of customer interactions logged due to concerns about problem gambling behavior for the last four quarters.

Also, please let me know if you can provide data for multiple operators in one request, or if I need to create separate requests foreach operator.

List of operators: Flutter Entertainment, Entain,888Group, bet365, Unibet

Response

Thank you for your request which has been processed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

In your email you have requested:

Data from the Regulatory Returns for the following operator: Bet365.

I am seeking the number of customer interactions logged due to concerns about problem gambling behaviour for the last four quarters.

Also, please let me know if you can provide data for multiple operators in one request, or if I need to create separate requests for each operator.

List of operators: Flutter Entertainment, Entain, 888Group, bet365, Unibet.

The Regulatory Returns guidance states that operators are required to implement policies and procedures for customer interaction where they have concerns that a customer’s behaviour may indicate problem gambling. This includes logging these customer interactions. Operators should record the total number of incidents on the customer interaction log for the period relating to the regulatory return, for GB customers only.

Operators should only record the number of customer interactions related to concerns that a customer’s behaviour may indicate problem gambling. The data should not include general customer service communications, marketing, or requests for information for AML purposes. 

There has been a long period of engagement with gambling operators to establish the process and create the right conditions for them to provide detailed information to us in order for us to develop more informed policy and to increase our understanding of the market.

The Commission does not disclose information relating to its correspondence with operators as the Commission relies on their submissions at the application, assessment and review stages of our licensing processes (including the completion of regulatory returns). We encourage operators to make frank submissions to us to allow us to take appropriate steps in a timely manner, reviewing licence holders thoroughly and fairly.

We do recognise that there is value in providing a level of commentary in this area using the information we are collecting. As such, the information contained with the Regulatory Returns is used to populate our bi-annual industry statistics:

Statistics and research series

However, ultimately, disclosure of information at the level of detail you have requested would be likely to impact on the voluntary supply of information from other operators.

Section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) (Law Enforcement) provides that information held by a public body is exempt if its disclosure would, or would be likely to prejudice the exercise of a public body of its functions for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2):

d) the purpose of ascertaining a person’s fitness or competence in relation to the management of bodies corporate or in relation to any profession or other activity which he is, or seeks to become, authorised to carry on.

The Commission is of the view that this exemption applies to all of the information that you have requested. Having acknowledged that the requested information is exempt under section 31 it is necessary that I consider a public interest test to identify whether there is a wider public interest in disclosing this information as opposed to maintaining the exemption.

Arguments in favour of disclosure

The Commission acknowledges that there is a legitimate public interest in promoting the accountability and transparency of public authorities.

Fulfilling this request may increase public awareness of work carried out by the Commission and support them in their choice of operator.

Further to this, increasing confidence in the Commission as a regulator.

Arguments in favour of maintaining the exemption

However, the Commission relies on a variety of sources sharing information in order to function as a regulatory body. Discussing within the public domain information which has been passed to us may deter these sources from sharing important material with us, as such prejudicing our regulatory functions.

The Commission requires licensees to make full and candid submissions throughout the life of the license. We provide assurance that we will respect the confidentiality of information that we are provided with.

Releasing this information would undermine our relationship with operators as the information that they provide to us as part of the regulatory return process is done so on the understanding that this will not be released into the public domain. If this information was disclosed, it would damage the relationship that we have formed with operators which would result in them being less likely to share information with us in the future which would undermine our regulatory functions and, as a consequence, have a detrimental impact on the wider public

Weighing the balance

Having considered the balance of the public interest, the Commission is of the view that the balance of the public interest lies with maintaining the exemption. The Commission recognises the importance of having sufficient information in the public domain to support consumers with their choice of operator. However, disclosure of the information would be damaging to the Commission as a regulatory body which ultimately serves to protect the wider public interest.

Review of the decision

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your Freedom of Information request you are entitled to an internal review of our decision. You should write to FOI Team, Gambling Commission, 4th floor, Victoria Square House, Victoria Square, Birmingham, B2 4BP or by reply to this email. 

Please note, internal review requests should be made within 40 working days of the initial response. Requests made outside this timeframe will not be processed.

If you are not content with the outcome of our review, you may then apply directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have already exhausted the review procedure provided by the Gambling Commission. 

It should be noted that if you wish to raise a complaint with the ICO about the Commission’s handling of your request for information, then you are required to do so within six weeks of receiving your final response or last substantive contact with us.

The ICO can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office (opens in a new tab), Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Information Management Team
Gambling Commission

Is this page useful?
Back to top