The Betting & Gaming Council (BGC) are considering legal action against the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC), ahead of the regulator's planned implementation of player affordability checks. BonusFinder, an online casinos comparison website, explores why a court battle is on the cards.
At their core, the Government-led affordability checks are designed to assess and potentially trigger operator intervention after a customer loses £1,000 within a 24-hour period or £2,000 over 90-days.
However, the BGC - Britain's largest gambling trade association, which includes Flutter, bet365 and Evoke - argues that these probes carry "serious failings" that leave the body "with little choice" but to evaluate possible litigation.
BGC claims up to 20% of players will be impacted by checks
The UKGC plans to integrate so-called "frictionless" affordability checks, known as financial risk assessments (FRAs) regardless of whether it garners support from the wider industry. The Board will be considering next steps by 22 May, 2026.
This follows a 2023 proposal to enforce similar affordability-focused evaluations in light of a multi-year re-evaluation of the 2005 Gambling Act. That proposition was eventually halted amid fears of mass player exodus to the unregulated black market.
Now, having led a trial programme comprising 860,000 accounts from September 2024 to April 2025, the UKGC estimates that only 3% of all domestic users will undergo harder, full-scale assessments, while the remaining 97% experience frictionless checks.
The UKGC is also expected to roll out financial vulnerability checks (FVCs): a separate, less intrusive risk assessor born from the body's 2025 industry consultation. Under FVCs, customers depositing £150 or more during a 30-day period would be subject to limited financial analysis.
But the BGC firmly disagrees with UKGC findings; according to the Council, when accounting only for those who spend more than £200 annually, around 20% of active users would be targeted by checks.
Pertinently, the group also argued that steep inconsistencies exist in the data provided, as three distinct credit agencies took differing stances when presented with UKGC figures.
Legal challenges being prepared by BGC
In a letter sent to the UKGC in April, BGC CEO Grainne Hurst highlighted "grave concerns" associated with financial assessments. Hurst has not yet received a response.
According to Hurst, her team may be forced to explore legal options in an effort to curb anticipated industry impact as a consequence of these imminent checks. The BGC forecasts that £300M in tax revenue could be surrendered if FRAs move forward.
"The evidence so far suggests these proposals are not fit for purpose and risk driving people away from the regulated market towards the growing illegal online black market, where there are no protections and no safeguards," explained Hurst.
Hurst, who previously stood as a Director at Entain for more than five years, said that the risk assessment scheme must be further taken to task before proceeding.
Tense period for the UKGC continues
Within the UKGC, there is limited appetite for additional scrutiny. The body stringently maintains that their proposals have been subject to requisite criticism.
Upon being approached for comment on the possibility of a legal battle, a UKGC Spokesperson told BonusFinder that it is focusing on launching financial assessments in collaboration with industry stakeholders:
"We reiterate that we are continuing to work on financial risk assessments, with one of the key focuses being on removing unnecessary friction for consumers. If introduced, the checks would apply only to a small proportion of the highest-spending accounts and would be frictionless for the vast majority of those assessed.
"No decisions have yet been made and we will shortly be putting recommendations to our Board on next steps.
"We are continuing to engage regularly with industry and other stakeholders as the pilot progresses, and will continue to provide updates as this work develops. Any future implementation would be carefully considered, evidence-led and introduced in a measured and proportionate way."
Word of the UKGC's possible legal battle follows the resignation of former CEO Andrew Rhodes on 30 April, as well as the end of a drawn out court process against billionaire Richard Desmond.
The regulator must now determine whether tensions with the BGC are sufficient to postpone its next steps assessment on 22 May, or welcome possible legal confrontation by introducing these new measures.
