SBC News UKGC maps out crucial industry lessons over rule 4 judgements

UKGC maps out crucial industry lessons over rule 4 judgements

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has emphasised that if lessons aren’t learnt from the way Ladbrokes handled the Tango Sky rule 4 case, then it will be forced to intervene and exercise its regulatory powers.

Issuing a corporate statement, the UKGC outlined that Ladbrokes had been misleading around the case of Black Dave, which occurred in January 2015. When placing a bet on Black Dave, trainer David Evans made a Ladbrokes trader aware that Tango Sky was going to be pulled from the race, subsequently the Ladbrokes trader shortened the price on Tango Sky in order to increase the impending rule 4.

For his part in the case, Evans was issued with a £4,000, that was later reduced to £3,000 due to his honesty throughout the hearing. With the UKGC now having finalised its review of the case, it’s now outlined crucial rules for operators when it comes to implementing a fair rule 4 policy.

In its report the Commission detailed: “We have previously stated that we would be concerned if there was evidence that bookmakers had deliberately shortened the odds of known or likely non-runners in order to maximise rule 4 deductions for their own commercial gain to the disadvantage of consumers. We commented that such actions would be contrary to the statutory obligation to ensure gambling is fair.

The report continued: “We have completed enquiries into a race that formed part of a British Horseracing Authority’s (BHA) investigation into race-horse trainer David Evans and the events relating to bets made with Ladbrokes on his horse Black Dave on 9 January 2015.

“Immediately after placing a bet on Black Dave with Ladbrokes, Mr Evans indicated that Tango Sky (the other horse he had running in that same race) would be withdrawn. Based on the evidence available, we concluded, and Ladbrokes accept, that a Ladbrokes trader had deliberately shortened the price on Tango Sky in order to maximise Rule 4 deductions.”

“Whilst the action was against company policy, Ladbrokes have acknowledged that they did not provide adequate training on the policy to all relevant staff. We also found that Ladbrokes had failed to appropriately review all information available to them prior to initially providing the Gambling Commission with what were proven to be inaccurate explanations as to the reasons for the price shortening on Tango Sky.”

Underlining how Ladbrokes has made amendments since the ruling, the report detailed the following points: 

  • Ladbrokes made revisions to its policy covering sports betting integrity and the misuse of inside information. These revisions mean that if it received similar information in the future markets would be suspended immediately and no price changes would be implemented. The market would not be re-opened until it was sufficiently clear as to whether or not the selection will participate.
  • All members of the Ladbrokes trading teams have been required to complete refresher training on sports betting integrity and misuse of inside information for personal or commercial gain.
  • All direct calls to the Ladbrokes trading team were/are recorded and audited to ensure that their relevant policy was/is followed correctly. These controls proved effective in identifying the sports betting integrity concerns in relation to Mr Evans which were reported to the BHA and ourselves in accordance with licence condition 15.1.2 before the race in question commenced.

Furthermore, the Commission also highlighted factors operators can address, as to understand if they’re implementing a rule 4 procedure correctly:

Policies – Do you have robust company policies that deal with sports betting integrity and misuse of inside information requirements? Do these policies appropriately cover the requirements laid out within licence condition 15.1.2 and ordinary code provisions 4.2.8, 7.1.3 and 8.1.2? Are the policies reviewed on a regular basis? Do they contain adequate detail to give guidance in relation to Rule 4 compliance?

Training – Are all employees working within the trading team trained in this area? Are records maintained in relation to such training? Are employees aware of the implications of non-compliance, both to themselves and the business?

Assurance – Do you monitor and audit the activity of your trading team to ensure any breach of policy is identified and promptly escalated to the Gambling Commission’s Sports Betting Intelligence Unit and, where appropriate, the relevant sport’s governing body? Is there a clear process in place to manage this effectively?

Betting rules – Are your rules in relation to Rule 4 accessible and written in plain and clear language?

Check Also

SBC News Entain concludes messy 2023 on £879m loss as UK/Euro headwinds continue 

Entain concludes messy 2023 on £879m loss as UK/Euro headwinds continue 

Entain Plc has closed its full-year 2023 accounts declaring corporate losses (after tax) totalling £879m …

SBC News Ladbrokes Stacey Carnell wins Betting Shop Manager of the Year award

Ladbrokes Stacey Carnell wins Betting Shop Manager of the Year award

Stacey Carnell was last night crowned ‘Betting Shop Manager of the Year’ at the Racing …

SBC News Entain triggers streamline as growth pains compound in Q3   

Entain triggers streamline as growth pains compound in Q3   

Entain Plc has outlined key initiatives to accelerate its operational strategy and improve the quality …