Study: Two-thirds of public back low-level affordability checks as concerns over privacy crop up

Almost two-thirds of the British public back low-intensity affordability checks, although there are concerns over the appropriate loss threshold, according to a new study.

Research undertaken by research consultancy Ipsos on behalf of GambleAware found 61% of respondents supported affordability checks, in principle, at the light-touch level.

The study added that 57% of respondents backed enhanced checks, with researchers noting respondents thought the checks would “reduce unaffordable losses among those who gamble, and reduce the amount of people experiencing financial harms from gambling”.

The checks, which have been at the centre of a fierce debate since their confirmation in the white paper into the Gambling Act 2005 review, are set to be debated by MPs in Parliament on Monday 26 February.

Currently, the proposed affordability checks feature light-touch checks for a net loss of £125 within a 30-day period or £500 within a one-year period.

The enhanced level checks are activated when a player records a net loss of more than £1,000 in a rolling 24-hour period or £2,000 in a rolling 90-day window.

Despite the overall backing from the public, Ipsos found that two in five respondents were unsure as to where the threshold for losses should be set.

Ipsos said: “When prompted, the proposed light-touch threshold amounts were more in line with public perceptions than the proposed thresholds for enhanced checks”.

The online study was completed between 29 September and 4 October last year, with 4,170 adults aged 18 to 75 taking part.

Other key findings from the research found that while there was general support for the checks, concerns did arise over the issue of invasion of privacy.

In fact, 40% said the enhanced checks would be an invasion of privacy compared to 32% for lower-level checks.

According to Ipsos, respondents also revealed some “scepticism about the effectiveness of these schemes in reality, with concern that people will find a way around these checks”.

Of the participants who’d actively gambled in the past 12 months, 10% said they’d reached the lower-level threshold, while 5% said they had hit the enhanced checks mark.

Ipsos added that around a third of respondents had not gambled online, meaning there is the “potential that a large proportion of the gambling population might not be flagged through these solely online checks”.

Ipsos concluded: “Overall, the findings show that the public are positive about the general principle of the financial checks.

“There is broad public support for the introduction of these checks despite some concerns on privacy and being deterred from gambling in the future.

“The findings also show that any future implementation would benefit from clear information on data use and the rationale behind any proposed threshold amounts.”