UKGC Withholds Fame Ventures Due Diligence
Regulator cites risk to operator trust and commercial interests in refusal to release licensing checks.
The UK Gambling Commission has refused a Freedom of Information request for the due diligence it conducted on operator Fame Ventures. The regulator argued that disclosure would harm its ability to regulate the industry and prejudice the operator's commercial interests.
Article Content
The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has withheld information detailing the due diligence it performed on operator Fame Ventures before granting its gambling licence, a Freedom of Information (FOI) response has revealed.
The request, dated 2 January 2022, asked for a copy of the checks carried out by the regulator to assess the operator's suitability. While the UKGC confirmed it holds the information, it refused to disclose it, citing several exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act.
Why This Matters for Consumers
Due diligence is the background investigation the UKGC conducts on all licence applicants. This process is a cornerstone of consumer protection, designed to ensure that any organisation offering gambling services in Great Britain is fit to do so. The checks assess an applicant's:
- Identity and ownership
- Financial resources and stability
- Integrity, honesty, and trustworthiness
- Competence and experience
- Criminal history
By vetting operators on these grounds, the Commission aims to keep crime out of gambling, ensure fairness, and protect vulnerable people. The refusal to release these documents highlights a conflict between the public's right to know and the regulator's operational methods.
The UKGC's Rationale for Withholding
The Commission argued that releasing the information would be detrimental to its ability to regulate the industry. It cited three specific exemptions:
Section 31 (Law Enforcement): The UKGC stated that its regulatory functions would be prejudiced by the disclosure. It argued that operators provide sensitive information with the expectation of confidentiality. Releasing it would damage this trust, making operators less likely to be open and honest in the future. The Commission believes this would "frustrate our investigative methods which could lead to a less compliant industry overall."
Section 43 (Commercial Interests): The regulator determined that the documents contain commercially sensitive information. It argued that disclosure would likely prejudice the commercial interests of Fame Ventures by giving competitors an unfair advantage.
Section 40 (Personal Information): The files contain personal data of identifiable individuals, which is protected from disclosure under data protection laws.
A Different Stance from the BetIndex Case
In its response, the UKGC drew a clear distinction between this request and the high-profile case of BetIndex (Football Index). In that instance, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) ordered the UKGC to release its due diligence documents after the operator's collapse.
The Commission noted that while the information was technically exempt, the public interest in disclosure was greater due to the "sensitive nature of the collapse of BetIndex and the number of people who have been impacted by its closure."
However, the UKGC emphasised that Fame Ventures is a "current, active licensee," and therefore the public interest balance is different. This suggests the regulator's default position is to keep due diligence on active operators confidential, reserving transparency for cases of significant operator failure.