Gambling reform campaigner raises concerns over Gambling Commission’s lack of action against Betfair after failings found at the inquest into her husband’s death

Annie is considering taking legal action after the Commission’s decision not to investigate further or take any action against the betting company, despite the coroner’s view that failings by Betfair contributed to Luke’s death and that lives are still being put at risk.

Last year, the inquest into Luke’s death concluded that Luke died as a result of a gambling disorder and a lack of meaningful intervention in his gambling by Betfair. The inquest heard that, in the weeks leading up to his death, Luke had spent nearly whole days gambling. A leading gambling expert told the hearing that Betfair should have identified him as being at risk of harm and should have taken further steps to intervene in his gambling, such as contacting him by telephone, restricting his gambling or closing his account.  

After the inquest, the coroner issued a Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report to Betfair’s parent company, Flutter, the Gambling Commission and the Government. The report raised serious concerns about the risk of further deaths unless action was taken to address the issues which gave rise to Betfair’s failings in Luke’s case. These issues included the inadequacy of Betfair’s player protection tools, the lack of meaningful interactions or interventions and the failure of Betfair’s algorithm to identify Luke as a ‘problem gambler’ despite the evidence that he was at risk of harm.

Shortly after the conclusion of the inquest, the Gambling Commission revealed that Betfair had been in special measures at the time of Luke’s gambling which was in focus at the inquest. The special measures process related to concerns about Betfair’s compliance with ‘social responsibility’ requirements which are intended to protect customers from harm. The special measures process concluded in May 2021 after a regulatory settlement was agreed between the Gambling Commission and Betfair, which was not made public at the time. After it learned of Luke’s death in July 2021, the Gambling Commission requested more information from Betfair but decided in November 2021 no further regulatory action was needed.

In August 2023, Annie’s solicitors at law firm Leigh Day wrote to the Gambling Commission on her behalf, asking the Commission to take regulatory action against Betfair in light of the new information arising from the inquest and the failings identified by the coroner. They also requested documents and information relating to the special measures process and the Gambling Commission’s investigation after it was told of Luke’s death by Betfair. 

In October 2023, the Gambling Commission responded to Leigh Day’s requests, stating that it would not provide the bulk of the information requested based on exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act. The Commission argued that disclosing the information would undermine its ability to carry out its regulatory functions as it relies on operators disclosing information in confidence. However, it confirmed that it was still reviewing the information arising from the inquest in order to make a new decision as to whether any further regulatory action was required in respect of Betfair.

In March 2024, the Gambling Commission informed Annie that, having considered all the information and evidence arising from the inquest, it would not be taking any regulatory action against Betfair. It explained that, in the Commission’s view, the concerns identified at the inquest had already been adequately addressed by Betfair as a result of the special measures process between January and May 2021. 

In response, Annie’s legal team wrote to the Gambling Commission stating that Annie intended to challenge the Commission’s decision by judicial review, including on the basis that it had failed to take into account relevant information from the inquest, had failed to carry out a sufficient inquiry and that its decision frustrated the statutory purpose of the Gambling Act 2005, which includes the objective of protecting vulnerable persons from harm. Annie’s legal team also raised concerns that misleading evidence had been given at the inquest by Richard Clarke (Manager of Customer Operations for Flutter UK & Ireland), who informed the Coroner that the Gambling Commission had looked at Betfair’s systems at the time of Luke’s gambling and had not required changes to be made, without making any reference to the special measures process which was ongoing at the relevant time (and which the Coroner was not made aware of by Betfair at any stage in the inquest proceedings).

In June 2024, the Gambling Commission informed Annie that its decision in March 2024 not to take regulatory action had mistakenly been made without considering the coroner’s findings and conclusion from the inquest. On that basis, it subsequently agreed to withdraw the decision made in March 2024 and stated that a new decision would be made by a different decision maker about whether regulatory action was required, based on a review of all the relevant information and evidence from the inquest. By this time, the Gambling Commission had held all the relevant documents from the inquest for over nine months and had already considered them in responding to the coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths report in September 2023.

The Gambling Commission initially refused to provide a timescale for its new decision. However, after Annie made it clear she was again considering a judicial review claim to challenge the Commission’s delays, it informed her that it expected to provide its new decision no later than the week commencing 4 November 2024.

After further correspondence with Annie’s legal team, the Gambling Commission wrote to Annie on 8 November 2024 stating that, having considered all the evidence from the inquest and the Coroner’s findings, it had again decided that no further regulatory action was needed.

The reasons given by the Commission included that the Commission was satisfied, when assessing Betfair’s systems in May 2021, that the changes implemented as part of the special measures process were sufficient to address the Commission’s concerns. It stated that the concerns arising from Luke’s case are similar to those already considered as part of the special measures process. Despite acknowledging that there is uncertainty as to whether the changes made by Betfair during the special measures process were implemented before or after the relevant time of Luke’s gambling, the Commission decided that it would not be appropriate to take regulatory action now due to the lack of clarity, the time which has passed since Luke’s gambling and the difficulties which an investigation would face at this stage.  Annie believes the Gambling Commission’s response to be entirely inadequate and is now considering taking further legal action over its continued inaction.  

Annie is represented by Merry Varney, Dan Webster and Helena Hart-Watson at law firm Leigh Day, as well as barrister Jesse Nicholls of Matrix Chambers.

Annie Ashton said:

“The Gambling Commission’s failure to take any action in light of the serious failings identified at Luke’s inquest is an unacceptable failure to carry out its regulatory duties and gives rise to serious concerns about its fitness for purpose as a regulatory body which purportedly serves to protect the public from harm. 

“The coroner’s conclusion and PFD report raised a series of significant concerns about Betfair’s failures to identify people at risk of harm from gambling or to intervene to protect them. These concerns were not only relevant to how Luke died but, as the coroner pointed out, will cause further deaths unless action is taken to address them.

“Despite acknowledging the serious concerns about Betfair’s regulatory compliance in Luke’s case, the Gambling Commission has taken well over a year to make a decision following the inquest and has now maintained that no regulatory action will be taken, for reasons which are entirely inadequate and reflect the approach which the Commission has taken to its role for far too long: to appease the industry and regulate behind closed doors without seeking to learn lessons or hold operators to account for failings which have such devastating consequences.”

Dan Webster, solicitor at Leigh Day said:

“The coroner’s conclusion at the inquest was groundbreaking and should have come up as an important wake up call to the Gambling Commission. For the first time, the failings of one of its licensees were ruled by a coroner to have contributed to a customer’s death and to give rise to a risk of future deaths if action was not taken to address the systemic problems identified in Luke’s case. 

“The Commission’s response has been entirely inadequate. Not only has it declined to take regulatory action; it has refused to provide our client with relevant information on the basis that it wishes to preserve its working relationship with Betfair and other licensed operators. The Commission’s handling of this case gives rise to very serious concerns about its fitness for purpose in regulating the industry and protecting customers from harm.

“Our client urges the Commission to reconsider its decision, to investigate Betfair and take appropriate regulatory action and to urgently re-consider its approach in future investigations arising from gambling-related deaths.”