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
Public statement

Mr Green Limited Public statement

27 February 2020
Search or save this guide

Search this guide by:

  1. pressing Ctrl+f on your keyboard if you’re using a PC or ⌘+f if you’re using a Mac.
  2. typing the word or search term that you’re looking for.

Save a copy of this guide by:

  1. choose the 'save page' option in your browser
  2. save the HTML file in your chosen location.

You can also save this page as a PDF by:

  1. selecting the 'print this guide' button or use your browser print option
  2. in the print settings window, select 'Save as PDF'
  3. save the PDF file in your chosen location.

Anti-Money Laundering:

Social responsibility:

27 February 2020

Operators are expected to consider the issues here and review their own practices to identify and implement improvements in respect of the management of customers.


Licensed gambling operators have a legal duty to ensure that their gambling facilities are being provided in compliance with the Gambling Act 2005 (opens in new tab) (the Act), the conditions of their licence and in accordance with the licensing objectives, namely to:

  • prevent gambling from being a source of crime or disorder, being associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime
  • ensure that gambling is conducted in a fair and open way
  • protect children and other vulnerable people from being harmed or exploited by gambling.

Mr Green Limited Executive summary

This case concerns Mr Green Limited (Mr Green) which holds a combined operating licence authorising it to operate as a remote casino.

The Commission conducted a compliance assessment in July 2018, in which three customer accounts were examined. Failures were identified concerning the manner in which Mr Green interacted with the customers from a problem gambling and anti-money laundering (AML) perspective.

Our investigation uncovered systemic failings in respect of both Mr Green’s social responsibility (SR) and AML controls which affected a significant number of customers across its online casinos. These failings stemmed from inadequate AML and SR policies and processes.

A voluntary review of its top 120 customers subsequently led to the closure of 113 customer accounts due to the fact those players were unable to satisfy the improved AML requirements.

On 8 October 2019 the Gambling Commission gave Mr Green notice that we were commencing a review of its operating licence.

Mr Green has co-operated with the Commission throughout the compliance assessment and the subsequent investigation and acknowledged that between 1 November 2014 and 16 November 2018 it did not have effective and adequately resourced AML controls in place to consistently address risks presented by higher risk customers.

This period of non-compliance pre-dated the acquisition of Mr Green by William Hill plc (which completed in early 2019)

The settlement agreement consists of a £3,000,000 payment in lieu of a financial penalty and Commission costs of £10349.77 Mr Green has also committed to conducting a compliance assessment of an additional 130 customers.

Mr Green Limited Findings

Failure to identify problem gambling behaviour

Operators must put into effect policies and procedures for customer interaction where they have concerns that a customer’s behaviour may indicate problem gambling.

Operators should also keep a record of customer interactions, and where an interaction has been ruled out, the reasons for this.

Mr Green accepted that between 1 November 2014 and 7 November 2018 it did not have effective policies and procedures in place for customers who may be displaying signs of problem gambling. This led to Mr Green not always identifying and interacting with customers who were displaying signs of problem gambling and, even when the customer interaction process was triggered, there was a failure to follow up with an interaction. Where interactions did take place these were not always recorded.

Examples of the social responsibility failings include:

  1. When making decisions in relation to customer interaction, Mr Green did not appear to proactively review complete customer accounts. Instead, it looked at isolated incidents of play. This was highlighted in the case of one customer (Customer C) who played once a month and spent large amounts when they played. Commission officials suggested that this game play may be indicative of someone who receives a monthly salary and plays until this is spent. The Licensee agreed that this could be the scenario but says it had not considered it. In our view, this led to Mr Green failing to take account of all available information to undertake SR interactions at the appropriate.

  2. Under Mr Green’s Customer Interaction Policy, the VIP team were responsible for conducting SR customer interactions without adequate compliance oversight to ensure no conflict of interest could arise. For example, Mr Green’s Responsible Gambling team referred Customer C’s play to their VIP manager after the customer won £50,000, proceeded to play all the winnings away and then deposited thousands more pounds. The VIP manager responded by stating the customer’s level of gameplay was normal and no customer interaction was initiated. At the time this customer had losses of £210,000.

  3. In relation to another customer (later described as Customer B) Mr Green failed to follow its own VIP policies and procedures. These required an interaction via telephone and email when a customer was designated a VIP. There was no record a telephone call was made, or email sent to Customer B.

Failure to have in place appropriate AML controls

Licence condition 12.1.1 relates to the Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing

Licence condition 12.1.1(1) requires:

Licensees must conduct an assessment of the risks of their business being used for money laundering and terrorist financing. Such risk assessment must be appropriate and must be reviewed as necessary in the light of any changes of circumstances, including the introduction of new products or technology, new methods of payment by customers, changes in the customer demographic or any other material changes, and in any event reviewed at least annually.

Licence condition 12.1.1(2) requires:

Following completion of and having regard to the risk assessment, and any review of the assessment, licensees must ensure they have appropriate policies, procedures and controls to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing.

Licence condition 12.1.1(3) requires:

Licensees must ensure that such policies, procedures and controls are implemented effectively, kept under review, revised appropriately to ensure that they remain effective, and take into account any applicable learning or guidelines published by the Gambling Commission from time to time.

Mr Green accepts it failed to conduct a risk assessment of the risks of the business being used for money laundering and terrorist financing from November 2016 – November 2017 in accordance with licence condition 12.1.1(1). It also breached licence conditions 12.1.1(2) and 12.1.1(3) by failing to ensure adequate customer Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD) and Source of Funds (SOF) checks had been conducted on customers who presented a higher risk of money laundering.

During our investigations, we identified customers who were able to gamble significant sums of money without adequate EDD and SOF checks being conducted. A review of the top 120 existing customers of Mr Green revealed that 113 had to be closed as they failed to pass Mr Green’s AML checks.

The Commission examined the following customer accounts:

Customer A

In the case of this customer the licensee did not effectively implement its own policies and procedures. Failures included:

  • The Licensee’s ‘AML – Source of wealth’ policy states that documentation or evidence should be current and not historic. However, Mr Green took ten-year-old evidence of a £176,000 claims payout as satisfactory evidence of SOF for a customer who deposited over £1m.
  • The Licensee’s ‘AML – Source of wealth’ policy states that the Licensee should carry out appropriate source of funds checks on higher risk customers. This procedure was not followed.

Customer B

In this case Mr Green failed to identify the customer as a risk despite a screenshot from the business account showing a company of which he was a director was nearly £12,000 overdrawn.

Instead, Mr Green accepted a photograph of a laptop screen showing currency in dollars on an alleged crypto trading account as adequate SOF.

They also failed to scrutinize the transactions within bank statements showing a combined total balance of £57,000.

Licence condition attached to the operating licence in October 2014 (valid from 1 November 2014), superseded by licence condition 12.1.2

The condition attached in October 2014 and licence condition 12.1.2(1) requires:

Licensees to put into place and implement the measures described in Parts 2 and 3 of the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 (opens in new tab) (superseded by the 2017 Regulations (opens in new tab)), insofar as they relate to casinos.

Mr Green accepted that between 1 November 2014 and 16 November 2018 it failed to put in place and implement measures described in the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 and of the Money Laundering Regulations 2017. This was because, between the relevant period, Mr Green did not have adequate AML controls to consistently address the risks presented by higher risk customers.

In the case of one customer (Customer A) Mr Green flagged this customer as high risk in accordance with its AML Policy and Procedures when deposits exceeded £25,000. It also carried out open source checks and requested SOF evidence on three occasions.

In response the customer provided a letter of an insurance pay-out, which was over 10 years old and was addressed to the customer and their partner. The Licensee admitted that it did not establish the SOF for this customer, breaching Regulation 28(11)(a) of the 2017 Regulations.

Mr Green Limited Actions taken by Mr Green Limited

Mr Green acknowledges the policies relating to AML and customer interaction in force at the relevant time were ineffective. It has now improved those policies and that process remains ongoing.

Mr Green carried out a review its top 120 customers, applying improved AML processes to its existing customer base. This led to 113 of those customer accounts being closed due to those accounts being unable to satisfy the improved AML requirements.

The Licensee has agreed to complete a compliance assessment of the next 130 top customers. Once this is complete it will have assessed all of its top 250 customers (measured by lifetime Gross Gambling Yield).

Mr Green recognises there have been considerable learnings from these cases and has invested in improving its AML and responsible gambling processes. Mr Green states it is also committed to working with the industry to raise standards, particularly in relation to safer gambling.

Mr Green Limited Regulatory settlement

In line with our Statement of principles for licensing and regulation, Mr Green has concluded a regulatory settlement. The settlement agreement consists of:

  • £3,000,000 payment in lieu of a financial penalty, which will be directed towards delivering the National Strategy to Reduce Gambling Harms
  • Agreement to conduct a review of an additional 130 customers in the same manner as previously undertaken to follow on from the initial 120 customers who were initially reviewed.
  • Agreement to the publication of a statement of facts in relation to this case
  • Payment of £10,349.77 towards our investigative costs.

In considering an appropriate resolution to this investigation, the Commission has had regard to the following aggravating and mitigating factors:


  • Mr Green accepted that these breaches were not isolated and occurred over four years.
  • The systemic nature of the breaches means customers not known to the Commission were likely affected.
  • The breaches arose in circumstances similar to previous cases which have resulted in the publication of lessons to be learned for the wider industry.
  • The need to encourage compliance amongst other operators.


  • Following its acquisition by William Hill, Mr Green has put in place renewed policies and procedures which it says will prevent similar failings recurring.
  • Mr Green accepted responsibility for the failings at an early stage and has been co- operative during the review process.

Mr Green Limited Good practice

We consider this case provides valuable learning for operators. They should consider the following questions:

  • Do you have policies and procedures in place to identify customers who may be experiencing or at risk of developing problems with their gambling?
  • Do you have systems in place to identify potential problem gamblers?
  • Do these include appropriate trigger points for when the usual pattern of gambling becomes unusual (these should not be just financial)? How do you protect new customers (where a pattern of play cannot yet be established)?
  • Are your staff sufficiently trained to spot problem gamblers and know how to report concerns? Are there clear procedures once a concern has been raised?
  • Do you know your customer (KYC)? Are you gaining a holistic picture of the customer’s source of funds, particularly in relation to VIP customers?
  • Are you critically assessing assurances you receive as to source of funds?
  • Have you ensured you have clear, up-to-date, and fit for purpose AML policies and procedures available to all who require guidance?
  • Have you ensured your policies and procedures have been informed by our guidance on AML?
  • Have you taken into account the Commission’s Money Laundering and terrorist financing risk assessment?

For further guidance on good practice read our Enforcement report (opens in new tab)


Mr Green to pay £3 million for regulatory failures

Published: 27 February 2020

Read the news story about mr green to pay £3 million for regulatory failures
Is this page useful?
Back to top