The European system of self-limitation in casinos and betting shops operates since 2009, but only in 2012 it became obligatory for gambling establishments in many countries. Users who prefer to gamble have reacted unambiguously – the number of queries on how to bypass gamstop on the net has increased manifold. Experts predict that if the current situation with bans and restrictions continues, the number of casinos trying to evade the obligation to transfer information to this unified registry will only grow.
The basics of the Gamstop system
Initially, the idea of a self-restriction system was the most well-intentioned. The plan was to put people on the register who, for whatever reason, should not gamble. The first version of the law mentioned:
- incapacitated citizens – those who are unable to manage their money by court or medical board decision and whose financial transactions could be challenged at any time;
- Real gamblers, who by decision of the relevant medical board should be blocked from entering casinos and betting shops;
- fraudsters previously convicted of acts against gambling establishments.
The main category whose rights Gamstop was supposed to protect was the players themselves, who at some point felt that the craving for gambling had become too strong. In this case, the player had to apply through the registry website and ask to be blocked at will. A notification would automatically be sent out to all establishments in the gambling industry, and if such a customer tried to enter a land-based casino or a slot machine hall, security would have to stop him.
The goals set at the outset are indeed useful to both players and casinos. The latter would get a tool to filter users – possibility to prevent registration of a player, previously involved in account manipulation or deemed to be insane. But the practice turned out to be much more complicated.
Problems began when regional regulators gained access to Gamstop’s databases. This made it possible to require gambling halls to comply not only with Gamstop rules, but also with general legislation in the gambling industry. Understanding which virtual establishments accept players from a particular country, they started requiring regional licenses. Casinos registered in Malta or Curacao found themselves obliged to apply for European permits in addition to the offshore ones.
Even that would not be a problem for big companies if not for the toughest restrictions on the bonus program by the standards of the industry. European casinos can’t give no deposit bonus at the start, encourage players to increase their average check, and run promotions with an obligation to raise the average bet. Some countries have gone even further – limiting the amount of time a user can spend on the site. In parallel, GamStop’s list of bans has expanded into a number of other categories:
Citizens who have been put on the exclusion list by an individual gambling hall without an explanation;
users who have been requested to be blocked by relatives or colleagues;
players who receive social benefits and are deemed by some services to be ineligible to spend money on entertainment.
The main category whose rights Gamstop was supposed to protect was the players themselves, who at some point felt that the craving for gambling had become too strong. In this case, the player had to apply through the registry website and ask to be blocked at will. A notification would automatically be sent out to all establishments in the gambling industry, and if such a customer tried to enter a land-based casino or a slot machine hall, security would have to stop him.
The goals set at the outset are indeed useful to both players and casinos. The latter would get a tool to filter users – possibility to prevent registration of a player, previously involved in account manipulation or deemed to be insane. But the practice turned out to be much more complicated.
Problems began when regional regulators gained access to Gamstop’s databases. This made it possible to require gambling halls to comply not only with Gamstop rules, but also with general legislation in the gambling industry. Understanding which virtual establishments accept players from a particular country, they started requiring regional licenses. Casinos registered in Malta or Curacao found themselves obliged to apply for European permits in addition to the offshore ones.
Even that would not be a problem for big companies if not for the toughest restrictions on the bonus program by the standards of the industry. European casinos can’t give no deposit bonus at the start, encourage players to increase their average check, and run promotions with an obligation to raise the average bet. Some countries have gone even further – limiting the amount of time a user can spend on the site. In parallel, GamStop’s list of bans has expanded into a number of other categories:
- Citizens who have been put on the exclusion list by an individual gambling hall without an explanation;
- users who have been requested to be blocked by relatives or colleagues;
- players who receive social benefits and are deemed by some services to be ineligible to spend money on entertainment.
Casinos that did not want to give information to the tax authorities were also at risk. The general and virtually unlimited access to the register itself has also compromised guarantees of anonymity. Because of the expanded list of organisations with the right to request information, leaks to employers and financial partners have become possible. Not all citizens are prepared to admit a small weakness for gambling.
A combination of these reasons triggered the creation of a whole group of online casinos that do not support the Gamstop system and defiantly refuse to obtain local licences. Thanks to the availability of the internet, the customers of countries where this self-restriction system has become compulsory have not stopped working with them. It is up to the customer to decide whether to play in a slot machine hall with a UK or Czech license, or remain a customer of a casino from the Netherlands or Kazakhstan.
How safe is it to play in the halls without Gamstop
The availability of information has made the creation of one-day casinos unprofitable. Players immediately ignore projects with poor-quality graphics and blatantly mechanical translation of the interface, check brand reviews and do not register on sites with too little history of existence. However, legal players of the market quickly identify such projects and block them; even advertising costs of such casinos do not pay off. Customers benefit from this trend – the quality of services has increased; all licensed casinos have reached roughly the same standards. Playing in a Curacao-licensed project is also safer than in a UK-licensed room. The situation is the same among providers – scripted machines are not bought. As a result, players are able to choose casinos based on specific criteria – assortment, speed of withdrawal, availability of convenient financial tools – rather than the presence of a license of a particular country. Whether to choose a gaming hall with Gamstop or refuse this service is also a client’s right. Especially since the possibility of a temporary ban is easily provided by any brand’s support team on the first request.
