_{The UK Gambling Commission investigates account restrictions by betting operators. (Koshiro K / Alamy)}

In a recent CEO briefing, Melanie Ellis, Partner at Northridge Law LLP specialising in Betting & Gaming, reported that the UK Gambling Commission (GC) is set to focus on the practice of account restrictions imposed by betting operators. 

Ellis indicated that the GC would begin collecting data regarding the number of betting accounts that have been limited, along with the reasons behind these restrictions.  

She noted that this initiative appears to be a sincere attempt by the GC to address an area generating numerous customer complaints and emphasised there were no indications from the GC or the government suggesting an intention to mandate operators to accept all bettors or wagers in online casino environment. 

However, Andrew Rhodes, CEO of the Gambling Commission, did not fully dismiss the possibility during the discussion. 

Rhodes affirmed that businesses retain the right to refuse customers but acknowledged a growing concern regarding the commercial motivations behind limiting sports betting customers. 

He articulated the Commission's goal of understanding the extent of account restrictions across the industry, especially in light of complaints surfacing on social media that may not represent the complete picture. 

This conversation on LinkedIn extended into the realm of potential cartel behaviours, brought up by Mark Conway, a consultancy advocate for gambling harms. He suggested that sharing information among operators about customers perceived as astute in sports betting could raise regulatory concerns. 

Rhodes replied that while it was an intriguing hypothetical scenario, he found little commercial incentive for such actions and highlighted that it would likely violate data protection regulations.  

Industry responses varied, with Tony Stephens, a sports trader, describing the GC's initiative as a positive step but expressing scepticism about how effective it could be. 

He remarked on the current practice of limiting bets on profitable customers while allowing losing bettors more freedom, drawing a striking comparison to past bookmaking practices where profit was derived from overall market balancing rather than selective restrictions. 

Conway echoed this sentiment, emphasising the disconnect that appears to exist between the treatment of profitable and unprofitable customers. He pointed out that operators with significantly higher sportsbook margins may indicate a reliance on specific customer histories rather than a balanced market approach. 

In a somewhat cynical outlook, James Makey suggested that discussions around account restrictions may be "much ado about nothing," fearing no substantial changes would result from the inquiry. 

Richard Hogg highlighted the reality of cash betting in high street bookies, contrasting the issues faced in online betting environments. Furthermore, Elliot Shaw commented on the trend of operators curbing successful customers in response to regulatory scrutiny over vulnerable bettors, noting the evolution of these practices with increased automation and algorithms. 

In summary, while the Gambling Commission's inquiry into account restrictions represents a proactive approach to addressing complaints within the industry, various stakeholders express a range of scepticism regarding its potential impact and implications for both operators and consumers moving forward. 

As the situation develops, it's clear the industry will be closely monitoring the outcomes of the Commission’s investigation and any subsequent recommendations.