Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited, trading as Betfred, has been ordered to pay £825,000 after the UK Gambling Commission found weaknesses in its anti-money laundering and safer gambling controls in its retail betting shops, particularly around B3 gaming machines. The operator has also received a formal warning and must undergo an independent third‑party audit, in a case that follows a £3.25 million settlement for similar failures in 2023.
The UK Gambling Commission has fined Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited, trading as Betfred, £825,000 for anti-money laundering and social responsibility failures in its betting shops, ordering a third-party audit and issuing a formal warning after identifying technical but “unacceptable” breaches in its 2024 compliance assessment.
UKGC penalty and formal warning
As reported by the Gaming Intelligence legal team at Gaming Intelligence, the UK Gambling Commission imposed a £825,000 penalty on Done Brothers (Cash Betting) Limited, trading as Betfred, for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures connected to its retail betting outlets in Great Britain. The same report notes that the penalty is accompanied by a requirement for a third‑party audit of Betfred’s anti‑money laundering and safer gambling policies, procedures and controls.
According to coverage by the editorial team at iGamingExpress, Betfred has also received a formal warning from the regulator, underlining the seriousness with which the Commission views the shortcomings identified in the operator’s systems. iGamingExpress further explains that this action follows a comprehensive investigation into how the company managed risk on B3 gaming machines in its network of betting shops.
Findings on AML failings
As reported by the Gaming Intelligence legal desk, the Commission’s investigation found that Betfred was unable to effectively identify and manage money‑laundering risks associated with customers using B3 gaming machines, despite using machine alerts and daily activity reports. Gaming Intelligence adds that practices in place during the 2024 assessment meant the operator could not properly assess overall customer spend or associated risks of money laundering and terrorist financing.
According to analysis from iGamingExpress, Betfred’s thresholds for triggering financial risk checks and source‑of‑income enquiries were set at £15,000 in customer losses or £125,000 in stakes over a 365‑day period, levels the Commission considered too high and not sufficiently risk‑based. World Casino Directory likewise reports that these thresholds were highlighted as faulty because they did not align with the risk profile expected under UK regulations.
Gaps in financial sanctions screening
As detailed by the Gaming Intelligence report, the Commission found that Betfred did not have an effective policy for identifying and handling customers who might be subject to financial sanctions. The article explains that this absence of a robust sanctions process formed part of the wider compliance concerns around the operator’s anti‑money laundering framework.
iGamingExpress also notes that investigators pointed to the lack of a strong policy for identifying customers potentially subject to sanctions, describing this as one of several systemic weaknesses in the operator’s risk‑management arrangements. GamblingNews’ coverage similarly states that Betfred did not maintain a clearly defined approach to identifying and handling customers who may fall under financial sanctions, reinforcing the UKGC’s criticism on this point.
Safer gambling and player protection issues
As reported by Gaming Intelligence, the UKGC concluded that Betfred failed to adequately identify spend levels and financial indicators of gambling harm for customers using B3 gaming machines in its shops. The same report says customer interactions did not always occur when risk indicators were identified, and when they did take place they were not conducted in a way that minimised the risk of gambling‑related harm.
World Casino Directory notes that the Commission’s assessment found gaps in Betfred’s safer gambling approach, including instances in which interactions either did not occur when they should have or were not delivered in a manner that reduced the possibility of gambling‑related harm, and that staff did not consistently assess the effectiveness of such interactions. iGamingExpress adds that regulators identified broader systemic issues with how Betfred monitored, recorded and responded to player vulnerability, which remains a key aspect of UK gambling regulation.
UKGC characterisation of “technical breaches”
As reported by the legal team at Gaming Intelligence, Commission director of enforcement John Pierce stated that the failings identified during the 2024 compliance assessment were predominantly “technical breaches” rather than problems arising from specific customer examples. Gaming Intelligence quotes Pierce as saying that the breaches were nevertheless unacceptable, particularly given that thresholds appeared too high and insufficiently risk‑based in practice, and that there were deficiencies in processes and procedures adopted by the licensee.
According to VegasSlotsOnline News, John Pierce also acknowledged that Betfred had made improvements to address its previous shortcomings and commented that the independent audit will be important in confirming that those changes are sustained so that the operator remains fully compliant with social responsibility and anti‑money‑laundering requirements. GamblingNews likewise reports that the UKGC has required Betfred to take on a third‑party auditor to prevent repeat failures following the enforcement action.
Betfred’s response to the enforcement action
As reported by World Casino Directory, Betfred’s head of corporate affairs and communications, Mark Pearson, said that the company had strengthened its anti‑money laundering and social responsibility policies following the review of its UK‑based betting shops by the Gambling Commission. World Casino Directory further attributes to Mark Pearson a statement that the Commission found no evidence of criminal spend in Betfred’s shops during the review, and that the operator remains committed to ensuring a safe gambling experience for all customers.
Coverage in iGamingExpress notes that Betfred cooperated with the review and underlines that the operator has already undertaken a programme of improvements in response to the Commission’s findings. GamblingNews’ report echoes this, pointing out that while the UKGC has penalised the business, it has also recognised steps taken by the operator to enhance its compliance framework since earlier issues were identified.
Requirement for independent third‑party audit
According to Gaming Intelligence, the £825,000 penalty is accompanied by a mandatory independent third‑party audit to ensure that Betfred is effectively implementing its anti‑money‑laundering and safer gambling policies, procedures and controls. The publication adds that this audit is intended to verify both the robustness of the systems and the sustainability of changes made by the operator.
VegasSlotsOnline News reports that the UKGC has specifically required Betfred to engage an external auditor to examine and confirm improvements in its systems, focusing on areas such as risk assessment, customer monitoring and response to indicators of harm. GamblingNews similarly highlights that the third‑party audit is designed to prevent repeat failures and to provide assurance that Betfred’s protection protocols can identify at‑risk players and suspicious transactions more effectively in future.
Link to earlier £3.25 million settlement
As reported by Yogonet International, Betfred previously agreed to pay £3.25 million as part of a regulatory settlement with the Commission after an earlier investigation revealed social responsibility and anti‑money‑laundering failures across its operations. Yogonet explains that those earlier failures included insufficient controls to protect new customers and monitor high‑velocity spend and duration of play, exposing customers to the risk of substantial losses without adequate safer‑gambling interaction.
The compliance newsletter Compliance+More notes that, in that earlier case, the operator allowed one customer to stake more than £500,000 over a two‑month period without completing any safer‑gambling interaction, a finding that drew sharp criticism from the regulator. The Independent and Next.io both report that the £3.25 million settlement, which included a divestment and a payment to socially responsible causes, placed Betfred among a series of operators facing UKGC action over social responsibility and anti‑money‑laundering failings, alongside Videoslots, William Hill and Star Sports.
Wider UK enforcement environment
According to Yogonet International’s review of earlier enforcement action, Betfred is one of several major operators to face penalties for social responsibility and anti‑money‑laundering failures, with recent cases also involving substantial settlements paid by other licensed businesses. Next.io reports that the Commission has emphasised the need for effective safeguards to prevent harm or crime in both online and offline gambling, framing the enforcement regime as part of a broader effort to raise standards across the sector.
GamblingNews notes that the latest Betfred fine represents a continuation of this trend, adding that the UKGC has repeatedly intervened where operators have fallen short on identifying at‑risk customers or suspicious financial activity. iGamingExpress underlines that for Betfred, the £825,000 fine and the accompanying audit requirement mark the second significant regulatory intervention in two years, reinforcing the regulator’s expectation that previous lessons be fully embedded in day‑to‑day operations.