UKGC Examines If Operators Truly Restrict Winning Customers

UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) Chief Executive Andrew Rhodes launched an in-depth review of how betting companies limit customer activity through commercial restrictions, a practice that faces substantial scrutiny and raises questions regarding transparency, fairness, and regulatory boundaries in Britain’s gambling sector. While the data did not reveal any illegal activities, the UKGC pledged to push for greater transparency in this area.

Customer Restrictions Could Have Unintended Consequences

While current UK gambling regulations permit bookmakers to manage their business risks, the scale and nature of these controls have drawn enduring scrutiny. Rhodes affirmed that while the Commission cannot interfere with the commercial strategies of individual operators, it must understand how such decisions shape market behaviour and impact consumers.

The UKGC collected data from leading online betting operators, gaining insight on the activities of nearly 15 million active customer accounts. The following review provided a glimpse into the extent of restrictions applied. Over 640,000 bettors faced some form of limitation, roughly 4% of all accounts. However, the nature, extent, and basis for those limits varied wildly.

It is not in our remit to mandate how operators handle their commercial liabilities, but we do have a statutory responsibility to ensure that gambling is conducted in a fair and open manner.

Andrew Rhodes, UKGC CEO

Before diving into the specifics, Rhodes noted that it is not the role of the regulator to intervene in a company’s risk management. However, he was adamant that the broader implications of these measures were worthy of consideration, especially since they could push consumers toward black market entities or cause them to adopt strategies like ‘multi-accounting’, which undermine player protection safeguards.

Winning Players Faced More Limits

According to the UKGC’s data, the most common restriction is a stake factor reduction, limiting the amount a customer can bet. Such reductions accounted for more than 60% of all restricted accounts. In some cases, the cap was so low that it effectively prevented any meaningful wagers. Closures were the next most prevalent measure, impacting 2.23% of all active accounts. A much smaller number faced market-specific limits, such as restrictions on specific sports.

Profit and loss data also revealed an intriguing pattern. Of the restricted customers, nearly 47% were in overall profit, compared to roughly 25% of the broader customer base. This data suggests a close link between betting profitability and commercial restriction, possibly justifying complaints by bettors who claim operators penalize individuals who win too often.

We are therefore exploring the scope for improvements in the communication and transparency from operators to consumers about how, when, and why an account might be restricted.

Andrew Rhodes, UKGC CEO

Despite these findings, Rhodes confirmed that profitable gamblers do not enjoy any special protections and operators are within their rights to restrict customers. He noted that the Commission will continue to engage with operators and stakeholders to clarify how restrictions are applied and explore ways to achieve greater transparency. Rhodes was adamant that the UKGC’s top priority was to usher in a fair, open, and safe gambling market.