The European Commission on Thursday gave Greece and the Netherlands a final warning before court action over restrictions in their gambling markets, the latest move in a push by Brussels to bolster competition.The countries have two months to reply. Failure to do so or a response deemed inadequate could mean they face the European Union’s top court, the European Court of Justice.

The agency objects to Greek restrictions on gambling and advertising, and Dutch restraints on sports betting, applied to foreign competitors.

The EU internal market commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, is overseeing legal action against about 10 of the EU’s 27 member states to crack down on national hurdles to competition from gambling companies based elsewhere in the bloc.

“If member states wish to ban gambling,” McCreevy said, “well, then I won’t cry at night about it. But they can’t be discriminatory against legally authorized gambling companies from other member states.”

Some EU states have said that curbs on competition are needed to cut addiction to gambling. But the commission said that, in the case of Greece and the Netherlands, the introduction of “new addictive games, intensive and increasing advertising and absence of concrete measures against gambling addiction contradicted that argument.”

Opap, a company which bought a license in 2001 to be Greece’s exclusive gambling service until 2020, “will defend its rights in every appropriate way,” the chief executive, Christos Hadjiemmanouil, said.

Stanleybet International, a British gambling company, is trying to start operations in Greece and welcomed the decision. “Today’s decision is another blow to member states who do not wish to play their part,” said John Whittaker, the managing director. His company urged McCreevy to pursue actions against Denmark, Hungary and Finland and take them to the European Court of Justice. The European Gaming and Betting Association, or EGBA, said national gambling legislation that does not serve “any genuine consumer protection or public order interest has no future.”

The EGBA said the warning from Brussels coincided with the Dutch government’s plans to issue a three-year exclusive online gambling license to the state operator Holland Casino.

The Dutch government is also looking to force financial institutions to refuse payment transactions to and from EU-licensed online gambling and betting operators, the EGBA said.

The Dutch state lottery, De Lotto, said that there were no harmonized EU rules on sports betting and that the commission’s decision had been prompted by pressure from primarily British-based online bookmakers.

“The European Commission seems to have set its sights on one big pan-European betting market,” the De Lotto chief executive,Tjeerd Veenstra, said.

There was no support for creating a pan-EU gaming market and the Dutch system keeps social costs arising from addiction and crime under control, Veenstra said.

A compulsive gambler who is suing bookmaker William Hill after he lost more than two million pounds, has been granted permission to expand his claim to include compensation for personal injuries.Greyhound trainer Graham Calvert, from Houghton Le Spring, Tyne and Wear, was already seeking damages for negligence during a hearing at the High Court in London.

But his lawyers had argued his gambling habit had cost him his marriage, livelihood and health as well as the money.

On Wednesday, Mr Justice Michael Briggs granted the 28-year-old permission to widen his claim.

If the judge does ultimately award damages for both claims in this landmark case, it could increase the vulnerability of bookmakers to legal suits.

Judgement will be given in writing at a later date.

Calvert, who is said to have lost an estimated 2.1 million pounds during a six-month period, was described by his lawyers at the beginning of the hearing last week as a “pathological gambler”.

His counsel, Anneliese Day, said William Hill had been guilty of “negligent encouragement and inducement” by not acting to curb Calvert’s gambling even though he had indicated he wanted them to on at least two occasions.

Far from doing that, William Hill had sought to encourage Calvert to go on huge betting sprees, breaching their own “self-exclusion” policy, she added.
Self-exclusion enables customers to ask that their accounts be closed for six months or longer.

William Hill denies any wrongdoing and says it can not be held legally liable for Calvert’s losses.

The hearing continues.

Original story here.

Gambling and betting companies are abiding by new liberalised rules that have allowed them to advertise on TV for the first time, according to the first compliance report published by the advertising regulator.

The Advertising Standards Authority said the compliance report’s findings vindicated its system of self-regulation for gambling ads.

For the report, the ASA monitored 784 ads – across TV, radio, online, direct mail, print and outdoor – to see whether advertisers were complying with new laws introduced on betting and gambling advertising last September.

Of the 784 ads monitored, just seven, 1%, were found to breach the advertising codes.

Six were TV ads - four from one advertiser, Intercasino - and the other a single pop-up internet ad.

According to the compliance report, Intercasino’s TV ads, featuring “three different scenarios that depicted juvenile behaviour among people with dwarfism”, breached the TV ad code for having particular appeal to young children.

In September the government introduced new provisions under the Gambling Act 2005 to allow betting and gambling companies to advertise on TV after the 9pm watershed, around televised sporting events, and more freely in print media.

Alongside the liberalisation, a tougher advertising code was introduced to ensure ads are socially responsible, particularly in regard to young people and “vulnerable members of society”.

The ASA’s compliance team assessed 312 press and magazine ads, 344 internet banner and pop-up ads, 56 TV ads, 31 radio ads, 28 direct mailings, eight circulars and five outdoor ads.

No official complaints were received by the ASA from consumers about the TV gambling ads when they aired.

However, Intercasino has agreed not to run the offending ads again after being contacted by the ad watchdog’s compliance team.

The ASA has only formally investigated one TV ad campaign following viewer complaints - a Ladbrokes ad featuring ex-footballers Ian Wright, Lee Dixon, Chris Kamara, Ally McCoist and Jimmy Hill along with presenter Kirsty Gallagher.

Viewers complained that the use of footballing celebrities might encourage young people to gamble, that the ads suggested gambling was a way to gain recognition or admiration, that the spots play on “male bravado and peer pressure” and that they could “influence vulnerable people”.

However, the ASA cleared the Ladbrokes campaign of breaching its code.

“The ASA understands the concerns of many members of the public about the potential for harm from irresponsible advertising,” said Christopher Graham, the director general of the ASA.

“The results of this compliance survey are confirmation that advertising self-regulation is working effectively and that advertisers in the gambling sector are demonstrating a proper concern for social responsibility in their marketing communications.”

Original story here.

A compulsive gambler is suing a betting chain for negligence after losing £2m when he was supposed to be barred.

Greyhound trainer Graham Calvert, 28, from Tyne and Wear, wants William Hill to pay back his losses on the grounds it failed in its duty of care.

“If I’d known I had the problem and didn’t do anything about it, I would see myself as being 100% responsible,” he told the BBC. “The fact is that I did try to go through the right procedures and I was let down.”

Calvert said he told William Hill to ban him in May 2006 but later opened another account and lost £2m, including £347,000 on a bet that the US would win the Ryder Cup.

He was earning up to £30,000 a month from training greyhounds and had built up savings of nearly £700,000.

He began gambling in 2005 and was soon placing up to 20 bets a day at up to £30,000 a punt. In May 2006, he opened an account with William Hill. After placing some big bets – and realising his habit was getting out of hand - he closed the account and claims he was offered “self exclusion” – where an individual asks not to be allowed to place further bets.

Two months later, Calvert opened a new account with William Hill in his own name and went on to lose £2m.

His legal team claims William Hill was negligent in allowing him to continue to gamble after agreeing he would be self excluded and it should be held responsible for the consequences.

The case opens at the high court next week. William Hill said it would contest the allegations.

Original story here.

Plans to build a “supercasino” are to be dropped by the Government but 16 smaller casinos will be given the go-ahead, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

A review of the Gambling Act, which cleared the way for eight new “small” casinos, eight “large” ones and a massive regional gambling centre in Manchester has concluded all except the supercasino should be granted licences.

Last January a run-down area of Manchester was chosen as the location for Britain’s first Las Vegas-style supercasino, which was to contain as many as 1,250 unlimited-jackpot slot machines.

Religious groups and the anti-gambling lobby had fiercely opposed the plans, saying the vast gambling arenas, the size of several football pitches, would fuel addiction.

While the plans were narrowly passed in the Commons by 24 votes, they were defeated in the House of Lords.

In one of his first acts as Prime Minister, Gordon Brown effectively killed off the supercasino by ordering a review of the entire scheme.

As part of the review, James Purnell, the Culture Secretary, wrote to the 16 local authorities which had won large and small casino licences asking if they wished to go ahead with the plans.

The Daily Telegraph understands all 16 have now written to Mr Purnell confirming they would like to proceed with the plans.

The Culture Secretary is preparing to make a statement to Parliament within weeks announcing he will give them the green light.

Origianl article here.