InTouch Games hit with £6.1m fine for social responsibility and money laundering failings

Company hit with third financial penalty for regulatory failures.

The UK-based online gaming operator InTouch Games has been fined for a third time by the Gambling Commission. The company, which runs 11 websites such as bonusboss.co.uk, cashmo.co.uk, drslot.co.uk, jammymonkey.com and slotfactory.com, failed a gambling compliance assessment last March, which triggered an investigation and the latest fine of £6.1m ($7.6m).

In 2019, the company paid a £2.2m ($2.7m) settlement for regulatory failures, plus a £3.4m ($4.2m) fine and warning in 2021 for further failures.

“This £6.1m fine shows that we will take escalating enforcement action where failures are repeated and all licensees should be acutely aware of this.”

Kay Roberts, Executive Director of Operations

“Considering this operator’s history of failings we expected to see significant improvement when we carried out our planned compliance assessment. Disappointingly, although many improvements had been made, there was still more to do”, said Kay Roberts, Executive Director of Operations.

“This £6.1m fine shows that we will take escalating enforcement action where failures are repeated and all licensees should be acutely aware of this.”

No policies or controls

This time, InTouch Games failed to take social responsibility for:

  • not interacting with one of its customers until seven weeks after they had been flagged for erratic play patterns and extended periods of play;
  • accepting a customer’s word that they earned £6,000 ($7,426) a month without verifying this information after the customer account was flagged due to customer spend and gambling during unsociable hours;

The anti-money-laundering failures included:

  • not adequately taking account of the risk of a customer being a beneficiary of a life insurance policy; having links to high-risk jurisdictions; or being a politically exposed person (“PEP”), being a family member of a PEP or known close associates of a PEP, within its money laundering and terrorist financing risk assessment; and;
  • not having policies, procedures and controls in place to address these risk factors;
  • not sufficiently considering the Commission’s money-laundering and terrorist-financing risk assessment or guidance;
  • not ensuring its policies, procedures and controls were implemented effectively.

The company was found not to have followed its own policy to request source of funds information from customers who had deposited and lost £10,000 ($12,371) in a 12-month period.