Duty of Care to Gamblers

[matth200]

Does the bank owe a compulsive gambler, (following disclosure of a gambling addiction) a duty of care to restrict transactions and prevent the overdraft from being used to gamble with. If the bank has a policy to restrict borrowing and this is not followed could this give a right of action to the account holder in a civil court to reclaim all gambling losses or is this too remote?

[David Sapher]

No matter how fun you find gambling, this activity can be addictive. Some people get obsessed with it due to financial issues, while others have inner problems and inclination to the addition of any kind. Anyway, as soon as casinos overshadow more important things in life, it’s time to reconsider your priorities.

I have researched this topic and can share some information about addiction reasons, signs and solutions on https://newcasinos-au.com/help-centers
Why People Get Addicted to Gambling?
Numerous factors can stimulate addiction. In most cases, there is a set of reasons that lead to a growing obsession with casino games and an urge to win. Sometimes the outside factors provoke excessive playing, but mostly the internal factors are the reason in the first place. Anyway, I discovered some aspects that in one way or another can influence a person’s gambling issues.

[leclerc]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

Well, Matt, it's over to you to give us some more information otherwise we have nothing more to say apart from complain and good luck.... without further info it's impossible to say what the next step will be for you....

[gravytrain]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

Mortgage arrears has a potential for financial hardship if there are other priority debts involved ie council tax arrears, utility arrears etc.
If there was ONLY mortgage arrears then possibly it is a complete non starter but we still need a bit more info on what was actually told to the bank.

Yes my point was that the bank cannot be held responsible for what the customer spends his money on, if there are signs that the customer is in financial difficulty that is a different matter, but that would only show up by failure to meet commitments(generally).

[leclerc]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

I don't think it is applicable L, this particular section is more about people who get into financial difficulty and cannot repay their commitments due to unforeseen -circumstances, not about preventing debt by monitoring the activity on un-defaulted live accounts.

I don't think the OP will find any help at all with this problem sadly, generally the credit industry as a whole works by insuring people are informed of the terms of financial products, then they leave it upto them to decide if it is wise to borrow.

The only other protective measure pre sale is credit scoring. Most of the guidance is aimed at protecting the consumer form unfair/unreasonable collection practices.

Mortgage arrears has a potential for financial hardship if there are other priority debts involved ie council tax arrears, utility arrears etc.
If there was ONLY mortgage arrears then possibly it is a complete non starter but we still need a bit more info on what was actually told to the bank.

[gravytrain]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

GT, have a read of the lending code section 9: http://www.lendingstandardsboard.org...endingcode.pdf

I don't think it is applicable L, this particular section is more about people who get into financial difficulty and cannot repay their commitments due to unforeseen -circumstances, not about preventing debt by monitoring the activity on un-defaulted live accounts.

I don't think the OP will find any help at all with this problem sadly, generally the credit industry as a whole works by insuring people are informed of the terms of financial products, then they leave it upto them to decide if it is wise to borrow.

The only other protective measure pre sale is credit scoring. Most of the guidance is aimed at protecting the consumer form unfair/unreasonable collection practices.

[leclerc]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

Personally i think that this is the only relevant/practical advice on this thread.

GT, have a read of the lending code section 9: http://www.lendingstandardsboard.org...endingcode.pdf

[leclerc]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

The account holder was in financial difficulty and cited mortgage arrears e.t.c in the letter. The DMHE form was not offered and the bank replied with a generic bank charges template letter. No mention of the disclosure. Any form of addiction or compulsive behavior is a mental health issue.

This point is interesting because I think you need to back up a little bit on the Lending Code section 9.

"178.
Subscribers should be sympathetic and positive when considering a customer’s financial difficulties. Although there is an onus on customers to try to help themselves, the first step, when a subscriber becomes aware of a customer’s financial difficulties, should be to try to contact the customer to discuss the matter. This applies to both personal and micro-enterprise customers"

The bit in bold is important because Mortgage arrears is a priority debt under financial hardship.
What exactly did the bank do? Unfortunately increasing the overdraft CAN be said to have complied with their obligation under the lending code.

I need to ask whether when the letter was written that the person was stating that the bank charges were unfair or that they were a gambling addict and that this was impacting on their ability to pay their mortgage?

[gravytrain]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

If there is specific evidence that the bank were told to not allow certain card transactions to go out, ie to betting institutions and they failed to adhere to that notification then perhaps we might look at whether the bank simply ignored the customer. That does not mean that the monies spent are refundable, because they are not but it might mean that it can be used as a levy against any debt owed.

Personally i think that this is the only relevant/practical advice on this thread.

[jon1965]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

Hi I really am not sure but I should think that the first thing to do is SAR the bank unless you have a copy of the letter with proof of receipt. At that point I would make a formal complaint. To be perfectly honest I don't hold out much hope as gambling per se is not a mental health condition although the causes may well be.

[matth200]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

So if we get back to the original question, does the Treating Customer Fairly rules not apply? Surely it cannot be right for the bank to ignore its own policy and put its customers at risk by not restricting facilities and ignoring a customers request for help?

[matth200]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

Was the issue of gambling affecting the ability to pay the debt at the point that the letter was sent in(part 246 of the lending code)?

Was a form such as the following link sent in(part 247 of the lending code) http://www.malg.org.uk/dmhdocuments/...20advisers.pdf ?

Was the person who wrote in about gambling stating that they were in financial difficulties?(If not then Debt and mental Health under the lending code would not have applied and further still, I do not consider that gambling would be classed as mental health under the lending code).

The account holder was in financial difficulty and cited mortgage arrears e.t.c in the letter. The DMHE form was not offered and the bank replied with a generic bank charges template letter. No mention of the disclosure. Any form of addiction or compulsive behavior is a mental health issue.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

I suspect a new thread is in order as I think there might be a case.......

Will do! Many thanks Leclerc! :yo:

New thread here: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...unarranged-O-D

[leclerc]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

I just got my friend and Company Secretary who lives near the branch to have a word with them and they cancelled the 'business essentials with Sage' 'add-on'. But I never got the charges refunded, just stopped. This took place in 2010.

I suspect a new thread is in order as I think there might be a case.......

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Duty of Care to Gamblers

I disagree with that advice on the basis that as it was a business account that any change to that account should be notified to you in writing. A few years ago, NatWest got into trouble for passing overdraft fees, ie yearly fees for the privilege of having an overdraft without notifying the customer of that charge. Hmmmm, did you ever revisit those fees?(perhaps another thread might be in order if you did not depending on how old the charges were from).

I just got my friend and Company Secretary who lives near the branch to have a word with them and they cancelled the 'business essentials with Sage' 'add-on'. But I never got the charges refunded, just stopped. This took place in 2010.