UKGC: No Recorded Policy on Crime Proceeds
FOI reveals regulator does not hold a formal document directing operators on how to handle money from criminal activity.
A Freedom of Information request has revealed the UK Gambling Commission holds no recorded policy on how gambling operators should handle proceeds of crime. While the regulator states operators should not profit from criminal funds, the lack of a formal document raises questions about regulatory transparency and consistency.
Article Content
UKGC Holds No Recorded Policy on Proceeds of Crime
A Freedom of Information (FOI) request has revealed that the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) does not hold a recorded policy detailing its specific direction to operators who have benefitted from the proceeds of crime. The response highlights a potential gap in the formal, documented guidance available for public scrutiny.
Context: Protecting Victims and Preventing Crime
The issue of how gambling operators handle money derived from criminal activity is a critical consumer protection concern. When a person gambles with stolen funds, questions arise about whether that money should be retained by the operator or returned to the victims of the crime. A clear, consistent regulatory policy is essential for ensuring fairness and upholding the Gambling Act's objective of keeping crime out of gambling. Without a formal policy, consumers and industry observers cannot easily assess the regulator's expectations or track how they are applied.
Details of the FOI Request
The request, dated 1 July 2025, asked the UKGC to provide its formal direction to operators regarding funds identified as proceeds of crime. Specifically, it asked whether the regulator advises that the money be returned to victims or if operators are permitted to keep it. The request also sought to understand how these expectations have evolved over the last 20 years.
The UKGC's official response was that the "information is not currently held in a recorded format." The regulator explained that the Freedom of Information Act 2000 only requires public authorities to provide existing recorded information and does not compel them to create new documents or offer opinions.
Despite not holding a formal document, the Commission provided its general position on the matter. It stated:
"The Commission’s position is that operators should not benefit from the proceeds of crime. We would expect operators to comply with their duties under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) and uphold the principles of the Gambling Act, namely keeping crime out of gambling."
The UKGC added that operators are required to comply with any relevant court orders obtained by law enforcement, particularly where victims have been identified.
Significance: A Lack of Formal Guidance
The response is significant because it confirms the absence of a single, formal policy document from the regulator on this specific issue. While the UKGC has a clear position and expects operators to follow existing laws like POCA, the lack of a recorded directive means there is no official, publicly accessible guidance to refer to.
For consumers, this raises questions about consistency. Without a specific UKGC policy, the handling of criminal funds may vary between operators based on their individual interpretation of POCA and their legal obligations. It also makes it difficult to scrutinise the regulator's approach over time, as the request for a 20-year history of expectations could not be fulfilled.
The regulator's stance places the onus on operators to ensure compliance and on law enforcement to secure court orders for the return of funds to victims. However, it leaves a grey area regarding the UKGC's specific expectations in situations that do not involve a court order or where victims are not immediately identifiable.