'Punters have been under-represented' - affordability checks need to be two-way conversation says head of bettors' organisation

Sports minister Stuart Andrew will be told first hand how punters must be part of the conversation over intrusive affordability checks when he plays host to members of the Horseracing Bettors Forum on Wednesday.

Increasing the voice of punters and highlighting more clearly their bitter experiences with affordability checks will be on the table when the HBF visits the minister for the first time.

HBF chair Sean Trivass said on Thursday that too often the people placing bets - and being subjected to the intrusive checks - are being overlooked in crucial discussions on gambling policy.

“Punters have, so far, been under-represented in the conversations and negotiations that have taken place," he said. "We want to make sure the decision makers do not leave out of the conversation those who are going to be affected by it."

“We hope and want it to be a two-way conversation on Wednesday. We’d be naive to think that the minister is going to have direct answers to questions he’s just been presented with, so it’s going to be more of a case of introducing ourselves and putting across the experiences and challenges that punters are having."

The HBF was created by the BHA in 2015 to represent the interests of those betting on British racing. Its meeting with Andrew comes at a critical point in the government’s review of the 2005 Gambling Act, with a consultation process under way that could influence the legislative outcome.

Proposed changes include punters being subjected to background financial checks after a net loss of £125 over a rolling 30-day period, with enhanced checks coming after a loss of £1,000 within 24 hours or £2,000 in 90 days. While it has been stated the checks would be frictionless, doubts have been raised as to how likely this will be and there are fears that a large portion of punters will be required to disclose personal information, such as bank statements, to continue betting. 

It has also been proposed that winnings from as little as seven days prior could be discounted when calculating a loss, meaning punters could be told to prove they can afford to bet despite being in profit from their gambling. 

Alongside its own questions and experiences, the HBF will be presenting the findings of an online survey of punters with the intention of providing as much detail as possible about the concerns gamblers have.

Sean Trivass: "We want it to be a two-way conversation on Wednesday"Credit: Horseracing Bettors Forum

“We want to be able to provide the minister with the facts – that x per cent of people have had accounts closed, x per cent have been restricted, x per cent have bet on the black market, or are going to, x per cent have stopped betting entirely,” Trivass said. 

“We intend to, and should be, going in to be friendly and we want to be able to make the most of the time the minister is giving us. We’ll take our bullet points and we’ll hope to be invited back in the future as a result of what we’re able to discuss and put across next week.”

He added: “The knock-on effect is something we’re keen to flag – someone has to voice this and we know we are the ones to do so. We can put across how these questions remain unanswered and see what comes of it.”

The unintended consequences of affordability checks are already being felt, according to former bookmaker Sean Graham. A regular punter and owner, Graham said the demands on bettors to provide personal information were too great and were turning people away from betting, or towards the unregulated black market.

“The way I look at it is that gambling is like everything – if people do it in moderation and in a controlled way it’s just like any other pastime,” he said. “I could go to a restaurant tonight, be given the wine list and order a £100 bottle of wine without any hesitation from anyone – no one would ask if I could afford it or should be having it. 

“However, for some reason the people behind this in government and the Gambling Commission are seeking to destroy an industry. The intentions these people have are good, but the whole point about it is it is being done without them realising the damage they are doing on an everyday basis. It’s way and above what’s necessary – people will go to the black market and once they go they won't come back.

“That’s what I find frustrating as gambling is being treated differently to everything else. I don’t think it’s been properly thought through and it can’t have been because everyone says the same.”

The HBF survey can be accessed via the organisation's Twitter page: twitter.com/HbfBritain.

To complete the Gambling Commission's consultation on affordability checks, visit racingpost.com/consultation and follow the instructions.

The Racing Post also wants to hear from you: What has been your experience of affordability checks since the white paper was published at the end of April, and what do you think of the government's proposals? Have affordability checks affected your betting behaviour?

It's a chance for your voice to be heard. Email the Racing Post at editor@racingpost.com with the subject 'Affordability checks' to share your experiences, your thoughts about the government's proposals, and your contact details

Read these next:

Labour peer hits out at 'pathetic' Gambling Commission proposals over affordability 

'Who the hell came up with this idea in the first place? It must be a small minority who don't like gambling' 

'Having a bet is part of ownership and it has just got more and more difficult' 

The Front Runner is our latest email newsletter available exclusively to Members' Club Ultimate subscribers. Chris Cook, a four-time Racing Reporter of the Year award winner, provides his take on the day's biggest stories and tips for the upcoming racing every morning from Monday to Friday. Not a Members' Club Ultimate subscriber? Click here to join today and also receive our Ultimate Daily emails plus our full range of fantastic website and newspaper content