Remote customer interaction: Consultation Response
Respondents’ views on requirement to act
Where an indicator of harm has been identified, respondents from the short survey were significantly in favour of actions that helped a customer access tools to limit gambling in the first instance. Following this, they identified preventing marketing to a customer in this position as the second most relevant action. Setting a spending cap on the consumer and preventing them from gambling was supported by fewer respondents to the short survey.
Respondents to the main survey held mixed views.
Of those who were opposed to the requirements, many considered that the rules on operators should allow for no assessment of risk by the individual operator and that all action should be at the stronger end of the scale and implemented automatically.
Many who were supportive of the requirement overall were nevertheless concerned about implementation timetables and the impact on small operators. Some called for detailed guidance to be made available as a result.
A number of respondents were fully supportive of the requirements and considered that incorporating them into LCCP would significantly increase protections for customers.Previous section
Consultation questions on requirement to act Next section
Our position on requirement to act
Last updated: 14 April 2022
Show updates to this content
No changes to show.