Spillehallen and LeoVegas, both top online casino operators have been reprimanded (albeit lightly) by the gambling regulator of Denmark for failing to observe AML (anti-money laundering) obligations.
This Monday, Spillemyndigheden regulatory agency of Denmark reported that it issued a warning for non-compliance to LeoVegas for errors in its verification process for customers. The issue was brought to the attention of the regulator by the company, when it discovered the problem in the course of an internal investigation.
This flaw involved new customers that registered with the casino’s Danish-licensed website between June 2019 and May 2020. It involved changing temporary accounts to final accounts and they don’t have to go through the necessary customer verification. To be specific, the accounts we’re talking about were approved using NemID – this is a well-known online banking log-in solution used by Danish residents.
On the other hand, Spillemyndigheden forbids online licensees from making use of NemID as an unrelated registration process unless they make a risk assessment. Else, “NemID cannot stand alone and must thus be supplemented by another control source or other mitigating measures.”
By itself, Spillemyndigheden determined that LeoVegas went against Chapter 3 of the Money Laundering Act on customer due diligence. Still, the regulator also noted that the casino corrected the problem in June. This means future problems of this kind have been averted.
The regulator also said they issued a warning of Spillehallen.dk, another online casino operator for various violations of the Money Laundering Act. The difference, in this case, is that the operator was asked to submit its AML documentation to Spillemyndigheden in September 2019, which they concluded was not up to code.
Spillehallen.dk submitted new documents in November and they disclosed there have been a major revision of the operators AML policies, controls and procedures which had all been initiated. In December of last year, Spillemyndigheden came to the conclusion that the operator was now in compliance.
However, Spillemyndigheden disclosed that the regulator was going foul of the law because it failed to follow rules that required it to make public its disciplinary decisions a day after such decision was made. Due to that, the regulator disclosed that its charge of Spillehallen.dk should have been published since last year.
In both cases, Spillemyndigheden did not penalize both parties, if there was any, both operators will not hesitate to pay for going against its regulatory obligations. As for it’s the company’s own failings, there’s every chance the regulator will sit up and do everything within its power to avoid the reoccurrence of such.