One of the most vocal advocates for affordability checks in UK gambling has urged the government to row back on its plans over extensive concerns over their implementation.
Dr James Noyes, who wrote in favour of the reforms in 2020 and 2021 as part of his role as Senior Fellow at the Social Market Foundation, said in an open letter to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy that key provisions of the proposals have not been met.
Today I sent an open letter to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, @lisanandy — calling on the Government to pause the implementation of financial risk assessments for bettors until a proper evaluation of the Gambling Commission’s pilot scheme has been published… pic.twitter.com/75IkUA1rOT
— James Noyes (@jranoyes) April 13, 2026
In particular, he said that the calls for affordability checks, which were included within the recommendations made by the 2023 Gambling White Paper, were made on the basis that they would be ‘frictionless’ and a gambling ombudsman would be created to ensure ‘proper treatment of customer redress and rights’.
“My support for affordability checks was done on the basis that there would be adequate oversight and evaluation of their efficacy, and that the checks would be carried out in a non-intrusive manner. Yet I am reading increasing reports that the pilot scheme has involved inconsistent data, unclear outcomes and unnecessary friction,” Noyes wrote.
The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has been running a pilot programme of ‘financial risk assessments’ since September 2024 to assess the viability of a two-tier system of checks to detect possible gambling-related harm. However, there has been no update from the regulator since May 2025.
Noyes’ voice adds to the rising tide of critics of the implementation of affordability checks over concerns that they will become overly intrusive and force players away from regulated operators.
He noted that there have been claims by some operators that different credit agencies have yielded different results for the same customer, and at an ‘insufficient level of data to adequately profile risk’.
A YouGov poll commissioned by the Betting and Gaming Council also found that 65% of bettors would be unwilling to hand over personal documents like bank statements as part of financial checks.
However, these results must be caveated by the fact that it is unclear how many of those surveyed would be impacted by the thresholds set out for the checks.
According to the UKGC’s last update in May 2025, the second stage of the pilot has found that 1 in 1,000 customers would experience friction when undergoing checks.
Noyes has now called on the government to pause any plans to implement the checks until a full evaluation has been made public and can be scrutinised by MPs. He also argued that the threshold for checks should be set for net losses rather than total stakes, as is the case currently, reducing the number of players that would meet the threshold.
During the first phase of the pilot, the threshold was set at £500 net deposits over a 30-day period, which was then lowered in February 2025 to £150 – in line with the plans laid out by the white paper.
Although Noyes stressed that he was writing in a personal capacity, his concerns carry significant weight given his senior role within the SMF. The think tank that has consistently advocated for changes to the UK gambling landscape, including supporting the significant tax hike implemented on remote gaming as part of last year’s budget, unveiled by Rachel Reeves.
Alongside Noyes, the British Horseracing Association has also written to Nandy, demanding a pause to affordability checks over specific concerns related to their impact on Britain’s horseracing industry.
