Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your request for information which we are processing as a
request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.  

We aim to deal with all requests promptly and in any event, no later than
20 working days in line with the statutory requirement.  In this case 24
December 2021.

For information on how we process your personal information please see our
freedom of information request specific [1]privacy notice on the Gambling
Commission website

If you have any queries about this email, please contact us.

Kind regards

Freedom of Information Team

Gambling Commission
Victoria Square House
Victoria Square
Birmingham B2 4BP

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/ab...

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your request which has been processed under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

The Gambling Commission’s response to your request is detailed below.

I would like to formally request any email correspondence relating to
football index/betindex between the forensic accountant assigned to the
case and other staff member of the gambling commission, in order of newest
to oldest

We can confirm that the Commission does hold information that falls within
the scope of your request.

As part of the licence review process the Commission will enter into
dialogue with the operator, legal representatives, other third parties and
internal members of staff. Information collected during this process is
for ascertaining if any breaches of the Commission’s Licence Conditions
and Codes of Practice (LCCP) or of the Act have occurred. This dialogue
will include communications between the forensic accountant and internal
members of staff.

The information that was collected as part of this correspondence was used
to inform the licence review. It is in the interests of all parties that
matters of concern to the Commission can be discussed openly and frankly
and releasing the information we use to assess if regulatory action will
be taken against a licence holder (whether a person or an organisation) is
considered to be exempt under S31(2)(c).

Providing this information would reveal details about how the Commission
conducts its investigations and revealing this information could seriously
impact on the Commission’s ability to fulfil its statutory functions.

The Commission is of the view that the information requested is exempt
from disclosure under section 31(1)(g) FOIA and therefore will not be
released.

S31(1) provides that Information which is not exempt information by virtue
of section 30 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act
would, or would be likely to, prejudice –

(g) the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of the
purposes specified in subsection (2)

The relevant purpose referred to subsection (2) are –

 c. the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify
regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise,

Disclosure of this information may lead individuals to think they can
reduce the possibility of any non-compliance being detected by the
Commission because thy understand the matter and priorities the Commission
has or has not decided to direct its resources towards. Non-disclosure is
more likely to raise overall standards in the gambling industry if
operators are not able to second guess or predict what specific matters
will be subject to a more detailed consultation or investigation, the
resources that will be devoted to it and the methodology the Commission
will use.

The more information about how a regulator allocates its resources and the
activities it is concerned with, added with information on how it goes
about investigating matters, the better able an unscrupulous organisation
will be to make an accurate assessment of the likelihood of a particular
activity coming to the attention of that regulator and therefore to
determine the risk of carrying out that activity.

Under section 31 it is necessary that we consider a public interest test
to identify whether there is a wider public interest in disclosing this
information as opposed to maintaining the exemption.

It is important that the public are assured that the Commission is
carrying out its functions in ensuring that any individuals who are
involved in providing gambling facilities to the public will uphold the
licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are protected.

There is a legitimate public interest in promoting accountability and
transparency of public authorities and disclosure of the requested
information could demonstrate to stakeholders and relevant parties that
the Commission is active in investigating. Furthermore, this disclosure
may encourage stakeholders to work with us and contribute to our programme
of work, increasing confidence in the Commission as a regulator and its
ability to uphold the law.

Public disclosure of this information may also, by way of demonstrating
our proactive work in this area, discourage unlawful activities being
pursued.

However, disclosure of the requested information may prejudice the outcome
of future investigations by the Commission, or another body by exposing
investigative techniques and practices to the detriment of the public
interest.

The Commission acknowledges that there is a public interest in promoting
the accountability and transparency of public authorities and the
importance of having sufficient information in the public domain to
support consumers with their choice of operator, however, disclosure of
the information would be damaging to the Commission as a regulatory body
which ultimately serves to protect the wider public interest

Having considered the above points, the Commission is of the view that the
balance of the public interest lies with maintaining the exemption.

Kind regards

Review of the decision

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your
Freedom of Information request and wish us to conduct a review of our
decision, you should write to FOI Team, Gambling Commission, 4th floor,
Victoria Square House, Victoria Square, Birmingham, B2 4BP or by reply to
this email.

If you are not content with the outcome of our review, you may then apply
directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally,
the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have already exhausted the
review procedure provided by the Gambling Commission.  The ICO can be
contacted at:  The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House,
Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Freedom of Information Team

Gambling Commission
Victoria Square House
Victoria Square
Birmingham B2 4BP

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your email requesting an internal review, I will arrange for this to be undertaken.

I can confirm that your appeal will be conducted by someone other than the original decision maker and that they will write to you directly with the outcome.

We aim to complete all appeals within 20 working days of receipt. We will advise you if we are unable to meet this timescale.

Kind regards

Freedom of Information Team
Gambling Commission
Victoria Square House
Victoria Square
Birmingham B2 4BP

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Sir

Further to your Freedom of Information request dated 26/11/21 which we
responded to on 6/12/21, and your subsequent request for an internal
review received on 6/12/21, we have now concluded our review and our
findings are detailed below. This internal review was conducted by someone
who was not involved in the processing of your original request and was of
a more senior position.

Your request was for the following information:

I would like to formally request any email correspondence relating to
football index/betindex between the forensic accountant assigned to the
case and other staff member of the gambling commission, in order of newest
to oldest

In our response dated 06/12/2021 we advised you that this information was
exempt under S31 – Law Enforcement.

When we processed your original request, we performed a search of our
email system for any emails where the email address of any person working
as a forensic accountant was either in the To/From/CC or BCC fields and
the words Betindex or Football index were contained anywhere within the
email.

We have revisited every email that was found in the search results and
reviewed each of them as part of your request for a review.

The review has concluded that we are able to release some emails to you in
response to your request. Please find emails attached.

Please note that some of the information contained within these emails is
exempt as follows;

Emails numbered 1 – 12 - these emails contain personal information which
is exempt under s40 of the FOIA.

Email number 13 – this email contains personal information which is exempt
under s40 of the FOIA where to disclose this information would not be fair
and lawful. These emails also contain information which we consider to be
exempt under s31 – Law Enforcement

The remaining emails that we hold, which also fall within the scope of
your request, we consider to be exempt in their entirety by virtue of
Section 31 and/or Section 40. We have set out below which exemptions have
been engaged.

Section 31 – Law Enforcement

The Gambling Commission (the Commission) was set up under the Gambling Act
2005 (’the Act’) to regulate commercial gambling in Great Britain in
partnership with licensing authorities. We also regulate the National
Lottery following a merger with the National Lottery Commission in 2013.

Section 22 of the Act sets out that the Commission has a statutory duty to
promote the licensing objectives as laid out in section 1 of the Act,
which are:

(a) preventing gambling from being a source of crime or disorder, being
associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime,

(b) ensuring that gambling is conducted in a fair and open way, and

(c) protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or
exploited by gambling.

Gambling operators are required to hold a licence from the Commission in
order to offer facilities for gambling to customers located in Great
Britain. The Commission goes through a licence application process as part
of this and makes an assessment of suitability against criteria set out in
the Act. Part 5 of the Act details the Commission’s statutory functions in
relation to the licensing requirements.

Once licensed, gambling operators are subject to ongoing compliance
requirements and are subject to regulatory action should they fail to meet
their licence requirements.

Emails between staff members generated as part of our regulatory work when
reviewing the manner in which licensees carry out their licensed
activities authorised by their licence, and, in particular, how they
comply with the conditions attached to their operating licence form part
of our assessment of that operator for regulatory purposes. 

The information you requested was generated as part of our compliance work
which was used to inform the licence review. It is in the interests of all
parties that matters of concern to the Commission can be discussed openly
and frankly between staff members. Information we use to assess if
regulatory action will be taken against a licence holder (whether a person
or an organisation) is considered to be exempt under S31(2)(c). Providing
this information would reveal details about how the Commission conducts
its investigations and revealing this information could seriously impact
on the Commission’s ability to fulfil its statutory functions.

The Commission has powers to prosecute offences that are contained in the
Act, and also has wide ranging powers in relation to investigating and
resolving regulatory matters, including imposing sanctions on licensed
operators.

Disclosure may lead individuals to think they can reduce the possibility
of any non-compliance being detected by the Commission because they
understand the matter and priorities the Commission has or has not decided
to direct its resources towards. This may result in operators or
individuals knowing how to present information to avoid further scrutiny.
Applying the exemption is more likely to raise overall standards in the
gambling industry as operators are not able to second guess or predict
what specific matters will be subject to a more detailed consultation or
investigation, the resources that will be devoted to it and the
methodology the Commission will use.

The more information about how a regulator allocates its resources and the
activities it is concerned with, added with information on how it goes
about investigating matters, the better able an unscrupulous organisation
will be to make an accurate assessment of the likelihood of a particular
activity coming to the attention of that regulator and therefore to
determine the risk of carrying out that activity.

An Independent Review of the Regulation of Betindex has been published
which provides further information regarding the regulation of BetIndex..

[1]Report_of_the_Independent_Review_of_the_Regulation_of_BetIndex_Limited._Final_version_130921_.pdf
(publishing.service.gov.uk)

Public Interest Test

The factors the Commission has considered when applying the public
interest test have been detailed below and it is our view that the public
interest lies in favour of applying the exemption.

In favour of disclosure

We recognise that there is a public interest in promoting accountability
and transparency of the Commission. It is important that the public are
assured that the Commission is carrying out its functions in ensuring that
any individuals who are involved in providing gambling facilities to the
public have undergone the necessary due diligence checks, including
financial viability, and will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring
that consumers are protected.

The Commission acknowledges that there could be positive advantages from
disclosing this information as the matter under consideration is the
subject of public concern and publication of this information could
alleviate these concerns and curtail speculation on the robustness of
Commission processes, particularly in the case of Bet Index.

In favour of maintaining the exemption

Releasing information relating to the email correspondence would lead to
the Commission being unable to make the full use of its statutory powers
to ensure gambling is fair and safe. Revealing this information is likely
to reveal the techniques the Commission uses in general when conducting
investigations. This could severely hamper the effectiveness of the
Commission’s investigatory processes in future cases; therefore, it is
considered that this information is exempt under S31(2)(c).

It could seriously impact the Commission’s ability to conduct the
investigation process, if information relating to what information it uses
to inform the licence review process became known; this is strongly not in
the public interest as it would impair the Commission’s ability to
regulate effectively.

Weighing the balance

Looking at all the circumstances of the case and the nature of the
request, there is more than a 50% chance that prejudice would be likely to
be caused by disclosure. Public knowledge of the Commission’s
investigative techniques would be likely to cause prejudice to the
Commission and may also frustrate our investigative methods. 

Releasing information about our regulatory work with a specific operator
and the mechanisms that we have in place to support that investigation
process into the public domain would be likely to prejudice our regulatory
functions and impede the future work of the Commission as outlined above.

The release of the email correspondence into the public domain would not
increase the public’s understanding as to how the Commission verifies if
an operator is fit to continue to hold a licence or increase
accountability.

Section 31(1)(g) of the Freedom of Information Act (‘law enforcement’)
provides that information held by a public authority is exempt if its
disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice the exercise of a public
authority of its functions for any of the purposes specified in subsection
2.Therefore, on balance, the public interest is in favour of engaging the
S31(2)(c) exemption when considering the impact upon the Commission’s
ability to perform its regulatory functions

The Commission feels that the disclosure of this information ‘would be
likely to prejudice’ the regulatory functions of the commission and future
investigations.

Section 40 – Personal Information

Information that we hold that relates to identifiable individuals
constitutes personal data.

The Data Protection Act 2018 requires personal data to be processed
lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data
subject. It is the view of the Commission that disclosing the personal
information within the attached emails and the emails that have been
exempt in their entirety would constitute the disclosure of personal data
and would contravene this principle.

This information is therefore exempt under section 40(2) of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000

In conclusion, I uphold our original decision that the S31 exemption is
engaged, however, the S40 exemption is also engaged and it is not in the
public interest to release the requested information.

If you are not content with the outcome of your review, you may apply
directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally,
the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints
procedure provided by the Gambling Commission. The ICO can be contacted
at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane,
Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Kind regards

Freedom of Information Team
Gambling Commission

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

References

Visible links
1. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...

Dear Mr Inman 

I write further to the above case reference regarding your complaint to
the Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) about your request dated 26
November 2021 under the Freedom of Information 2000 (“FOIA"). 

Background  

On 26 November 2021, you requested the following information: 

“I would like to formally request any email correspondence relating to
football index/betindex between the forensic accountant assigned to the
case and other staff member of the gambling commission, in order of newest
to oldest.” 

We initially responded to this request on 6 December 2021 advising that
the Section 31 (Law Enforcement) exemption applied, and that the
information would not be disclosed. 

In response to your review request received on 6 December 2021 we
revisited the request, and some information was provided to you. The
majority of emails however remained exempt, and the Commission explained
that it considered the following exemptions applied: 

·         Section 31 – Law Enforcement   

·         Section 40 Personal Information. 

The Commission was contacted by the ICO on 14 July 2022 in relation to
your formal complaint.  

The Commission’s current position 

Following your complaint to the Information Commissioner the Commission
has given further consideration to your request. After careful
consideration, we consider the requested information is exempt from
disclosure under s14(1) (Vexatious or repeated requests) of the FOIA.  

Due to the scale of the material within potential scope of your request,
the Commission considers processing your request would place a grossly
oppressive burden on our resources which outweighs any value or serious
purpose the request may have, particularly as extensive information has
already been disclosed by the Commission and been made available in the
published report into the collapse of BetIndex Limited by Michael Sheehan
QC. The Commission’s position is therefore that the information is exempt
from disclosure under s14(1) of the FOIA.  

We confirm the ICO has also been notified.  

Yours sincerely 

Freedom of Information Team 
Gambling Commission 

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

Dear Sir

Further to the decision notice from the Information Commissioner’s Office
(ICO) dated 21 September 2022 in relation to Case reference
IC-148722-B6G9, I can confirm that we are currently processing your
request.

While preparing the information for disclosure, we have identified that
the following exemptions have been engaged:

S31 – Law Enforcement

S41 – Information provided in Confidence

S42 – Legal professional Privilege

The above exemptions are qualified exemptions which requires us to
consider the Public Interest Test in terms of disclosure.

Please be advised that we will require additional time to consider the
public interest test in relation to these exemptions.

We will aim to provide you with a response by close of business on 4^th
November 2022.

Regards

Freedom of Information Team

Gambling Commission
Victoria Square House
Victoria Square
Birmingham B2 4BP

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

Dear Mr Inman

Ref: ICO Case Reference: IC-148722-B6G9

Please find attached our response to your Freedom of Information request.

Kind regards

Freedom of Information Team

Gambling Commission
Victoria Square House
Victoria Square
Birmingham B2 4BP

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

Dear Sir

Thank you for your emails received on 09/11/2022.

I can confirm that an internal review will be undertaken with regards to
the response that was sent to you on 04/11/2022.

We aim to complete all appeals within 20 working days of receipt.  We will
advise you if we are unable to meet this timescale. 

The information that you have requested relating to the attachments to the
emails will be processed as a new request.

We aim to deal with all requests promptly and in any event, no later than
20 working days in line with the statutory requirement.  In this case
07/12/2022

For information on how we process your personal information, please see
our freedom of information request specific [1]privacy notice on the
Gambling Commission website

If you have any queries about this email, please contact us.

Kind regards

Freedom of Information Team

Gambling Commission
Victoria Square House
Victoria Square
Birmingham B2 4BP

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/ab...

Dear Mr Inman

Please find attached a response to your recent review request, relating to
your initial request 211126-CI. You new request for the email attachments
in question is being dealt with separately.

Kind regards

Freedom of Information Team

Gambling Commission

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

Sent by email only: [1][FOI #810827 email]

Mr Chis Inman

7 December 2022

Dear Mr Inman

Re: Freedom of Information Request

Thank you for your request which has been processed under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

Your request was for the attachments to the emails that were sent to you
on 4 November.

We have reviewed the emails that were sent to you and identified the
emails with attachments. We have reviewed these attachments and have
provided the documents that we are able to disclose to you.

Please note that the Commission has retained some documents and redacted
some information contained within the documents we have disclosed, that we
consider are exempt for the reasons set out below.

Exemptions

Our considerations for engaging these exemptions are detailed below.

Law Enforcement – Section 31

Section 31(1)(g) exempts information whose disclosure would, or would be
likely to, prejudice the exercise by any public authority of its functions
for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2).

The Commission considers the subsections below apply and therefore the
information is exempt from disclosure:

i.                 Subsection 31(2)(b) refers to the purpose of
ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is
improper,

ii.               Subsection 31(2)(c) refers to the purpose of
ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action
in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise,

iii.              Subsection 31(2)(d) refers to the purpose of
ascertaining a person’s fitness or competence in relation to the
management of bodies corporate or in relation to any profession or other
activity which he is, or seeks to become, authorised to carry on

It is our view that the regulatory functions of the Commission, would be
prejudiced by disclosure of this information as it would:

i.       prejudice the Commission’s ability to fulfil its statutory
functions by revealing how the Commission assesses operators’ and
individuals as well as applications for regulatory purposes, and

ii.      prejudice the Commission’s compliance and enforcement activity
and raise overall standards in the gambling industry as it would undermine
the trust the Commission has gained with operators in terms of disclosing
information where it is necessary and proportionate and to cooperate in an
open manner.

i) Undermining statutory functions

• Once licensed, gambling operators are subject to ongoing compliance
requirements and are subject to regulatory action should they fail to
meet their licence requirements.
• The release of the email correspondence between a forensic accountant
and other members of staff within the Commission will have a direct
impact on our statutory functions, by not only providing information
to enable licensees to understand what information is requested and
assessed though the review process but also undermining the assessment
process itself which determines how operators are complying with the
requirements of the Licence conditions and codes of practice (LCCP)
which will ultimately impact on consumers.
• The Commission considers that disclosure of the requested information
would provide licensees with information that could be used to
undermine and circumvent the assessment process and reduce the
possibility of any non-compliance being detected by the Commission.
Licensees would have knowledge of the particular areas of the
assessment that the Commission directs its resources towards, the
particular form and type of evidence required to obtain particular
ratings and conversely what evidence does not appear to be relevant to
the Commission’s assessment.
• The Commission’s concern is that this would result in licensees using
the disclosed information to present information in a manner which
would avoid further scrutiny or be targeted at the particular factors
which those assessing compliance are considering for evidence of
compliance with the published framework.
• By releasing the emails into the public domain, the Commission will be
in a position where it will not be able to rely on the current process
to assess compliance and would need to introduce further assessment
processes which have not been disclosed to ensure that the assessment
process remains robust and fit for purpose in order for the Commission
to perform its statutory functions.

(ii) Raising overall standards in the gambling industry

• The Commission also takes the view that disclosure is likely to reduce
the overall standards in the gambling industry because releasing this
information would undermine our relationship with licensees as the
information that they provide to us as part of the review process is
done so on the understanding that this will not be released into the
public domain. If this information was disclosed, it would damage the
relationship that we have formed with licensees which would result in
them being less likely to share information with us in the future
which would undermine our regulatory functions and, as a consequence,
have a detrimental impact on the wider public.
• Establishing trust with licensees is key to having open and frank
exchanges and this, in turn, will make licensees more inclined to
provide commercially sensitive information on the basis it is trusted
to be kept with appropriate safeguards. Disclosing the requested
information without sufficient rationale would undermine this trust
and make licensees less likely to cooperate fully in the future.
• The Commission considers that if it were to be in a situation in the
future where it must use its formal powers to compel the provision of
information then this information, provided under compulsion, would be
of a different and arguably less satisfactory quality than if
information was voluntarily supplied.
• The Commission therefore concludes that the disclosure of this
information would prejudice the regulatory functions of the
Commission.

Public interest test

The factors the Commission has considered when applying the public
interest test have been detailed below and our view is that the public
interest lies in favour of applying the exemption.

(a) In favour of disclosure

• The Commission is a public body which is required to regulate the
gambling industry in the public interest. There is therefore a public
interest in members of the public having confidence the Commission is
being open and honest with the information it holds so that it can be
held to account. It is important that the public are assured that the
Commission is carrying out its functions in ensuring that any
individuals or organisations who are involved in providing gambling
facilities to the public have undergone the necessary assessments and
will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are
protected.
• Disclosure of the requested information could demonstrate to
stakeholders and relevant parties how the Commission is assessing
licensees and, furthermore, this disclosure may encourage stakeholders
to work with us and contribute to our programme of work, increasing
confidence in the Commission as a regulator and its ability to uphold
the law.
• Further, in the specific context of this case, we recognise that there
is significant public interest in relation to the collapse of BetIndex
and disclosure of these documents would provide some additional
information as to how the Commission assessed BetIndex in line with
the requirements of the LCCP.

(b) In favour of maintaining the exemption

• The Commission has robust and effective processes and procedures in
place which are utilised when assessing existing licensees.  These
procedures and processes have been put in place to minimise the risk
of an operator continuing to provide gambling services where they do
not meet the required standards. This demonstrates to the public at
large that they can have confidence in the Commission’s compliance
assessment processes.
• There is an expectation of confidence in much of the Commission’s
work, particularly regarding the internal conversations that take
place between colleagues when discussing areas of a licensee’s
compliance with the LCCP. It is the impact on this work of the
Commission which is more likely to be affected by disclosure. The
amount of specific information the Commission can release relating to
our specific discussions about a licensee could lead to potentially
non-compliant licenses altering their behaviour specifically to meet
the Commission’s standards purely for assessment purposes. This in
turn may impact on the Commission’s function of ascertaining a
gambling operator’s fitness to carry out gambling activities.
• Disclosure of this information would also undermine the Commission's
ability to uphold the licensing objectives which would impact on the
trust and confidence of the public in it as a regulator.
• Further, disclosure of the requested information would prejudice the
outcome of future assessments by the Commission by exposing assessment
techniques and practices to the detriment of the public interest.
• As regards the particular public interest in the collapse of BetIndex,
the Commission relies on the fact that since responding to both the
initial request and the review, an Independent Review of the
Regulation of BetIndex has been published which provides a detailed
narrative relating to BetIndex. Details can be found here:

[2]Report_of_the_Independent_Review_of_the_Regulation_of_BetIndex_Limited._Final_version_130921_.pdf
(publishing.service.gov.uk)

• Operators are required to provide detailed information and there are
statutory mechanisms in place to compel the provision of information,
but this is not the most effective way to obtain information. The
Commission relies on the voluntary provision of information to perform
its functions and open and frank exchanges are integral to decision
making.
• Disclosing information without sufficient rationale would undermine
this trust and make operators less likely to cooperate with requests
in future. This would potentially result in the Commission having to
use its more formal statutory powers in the future, leading to more
guarded disclosures which would not be in the public interest. The
attachments alone would not be of any assistance in furthering the
public debate in this matter as this is only part of the information
that we hold and use to assess operator suitability.

(c) Weighing the balance

• The Commission acknowledges that there is a public interest in
promoting the accountability and transparency of public authorities
and the importance of having sufficient information in the public
domain to support consumers with their choice of operator, however,
disclosure of the information would be damaging to the Commission as a
regulatory body which ultimately serves to protect the wider public
interest.
• It is important that the public are assured that the Commission is
carrying out its functions in ensuring that any
individuals/organisations who are involved in providing gambling
facilities to the public have undergone the necessary assessments and
will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are
protected.
• However, there is a strong public interest in preserving the processes
that the Commission has in place to assess operators’ compliance with
the LCCP and identify any operators who will be unable to comply with
the licensing requirements. The public trust that the Commission has
robust processes in place to assess operators so that when they use
the services provided by an operator, they are confident that there
has been sufficient scrutiny of that operator to ensure that they are
protected. If this information were released it would undermine that
confidence.
• Looking at all the circumstances of the case and the nature of the
request, the Commission considers that the relevant prejudice
identified above would be caused to the Commission by disclosure and
this weighs in the balance when considering the question of public
interest. Public knowledge of the conversations between a forensic
accountant and other staff within the Commission is very unlikely to
contribute to a proper understanding of the regulatory activities of
the Commission.  There is sufficient information already published on
our website to satisfy the public interest in this matter in general
terms and the independent report in relation to the collapse of
BetIndex, which considers the Commission’s regulatory functions serve
any specific public interest in that respect.
• We consider that the public interest is better served by withholding
the documents ensuring that consumers are protected through our
processes rather than releasing information about our processes which
in our view will not benefit the public as a whole.

Personal Information - Section 40

We consider the information that we hold relating to the email addresses,
opinions and other information of Commission staff to be their personal
information. We have removed from the documents information that we hold
that relates to identifiable individuals which constitutes their personal
data. In reaching this decision we have taken into account the information
that may also be available in the public domain which would enable staff
to be identified.

The Commission licenses and regulates the people and businesses that
provide gambling in Great Britain. Its functions and powers in this
respect are derived from the Gambling Act 2005 (the Act). We recognise
that there is a legitimate public interest in promoting the accountability
and transparency of the Commission. In disclosing this information
customers will have confidence that staff employed at the Commission are
experienced within the industry and have the knowledge to discuss issues
with colleagues on actions that they should take to resolve issues or take
a relevant course of action.

However, we do not consider the disclosure of the personal information of
members of staff is necessary as to do so would disclose the personal
information of that individual. The individuals concerned also have the
expectation that their information will not be shared unlawfully
especially in circumstances where there is a potential risk to their
health and safety. Release of the information would cause unnecessary or
unjustified damage or distress to members of staff due to the subject
matter being discussed and the strength of public feeling about these
matters. There is likely to be unwanted attention from aggrieved customers
of BetIndex who will target individuals specifically for the role that
they have within the Commission.

Legal Professional Privilege – Section 42

Section 42 provides an exemption under the FOIA for Legal Professional
Privilege (LPP).  Information in respect of which a claim to legal
professional privilege or, in Scotland, to confidentiality of
communications could be maintained in legal proceedings is exempt
information. LPP protects the confidentiality of free and frank
communications between a legal advisor and a client.

• The documents that are not being disclosed pertain to legal advice
provided to Commission staff (clients).
• The communications between the legal advisor and the client were
provided for the main purpose of legal advice to the Commission. 
• There has been no previous disclosure of the information contained
within the documents and therefore the advice remains confidential.

Public interest test

The factors the Commission has considered when applying the public
interest test have been detailed below and our view is that the public
interest lies in favour of applying the exemption.

(a) In favour of disclosure

• The Commission is a public body which is required to regulate the
gambling industry in the public interest. There is therefore a public
interest in members of the public having confidence that the
Commission is being open and honest with the information it holds so
that it can be held to account.
• There is public interest in knowing what legal advice was obtained in
relation to BetIndex so the public can be assured that the correct
advice was provided, due to the number of individuals impacted by its
collapse.

(b) In favour of maintaining the exemption

• There is a strong public interest in Commission staff being able to
access full and frank legal advice without concerns that this advice
will be disclosed.
• Disclosure may hinder the candid nature of communications in the
future which could be damaging to future decision making which is not
in the public interest.
• Disclosure may have a negative impact upon the frankness of legal
advice provided and may even have an impact upon the extent that legal
advice is sought. This would also not be in the public interest.

(c) Weighing the balance

• The Commission recognises that there is a public interest in
disclosure of information relating to BetIndex, however, there is a
greater argument in favour of safeguarding the communications between
clients and their legal advisors to ensure access to full and frank
legal advice. The advice provided is the opinion of a legally
qualified individual and is not a definitive statement in law.
• Disclosure of this information would infringe on the rights of
Commission staff to gain legal advice on matters which ultimately
could impact on consumers.
• On balance, we consider that the public interest is better served by
withholding the documents ensuring that the provision of legal advice
is safeguarded.

Please note that emails 002, 003, 004, 009, 010, 011, 012, 031, 034, 041,
046, 050, 051, 054, 058, 059, 060, 061, 062, 063, 081 and 082 show as
having an attachment; these are not documents. When using Microsoft office
products within an organisation users can add a profile picture to their
name. These are visible to all users when using the products within
Microsoft. When emails are saved as PDF copies to allow for redactions,
these profile pictures show as an image attachment to the email,
therefore, it will appear that there are attachments when they are not.

Review of the decision

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your
Freedom of Information request you are entitled to an internal review of
our decision. You should write to FOI Team, Gambling Commission, 4th
floor, Victoria Square House, Victoria Square, Birmingham, B2 4BP or by
reply to this email.

Please note, internal review requests should be made within 40 working
days of the initial response. Requests made outside this timeframe will
not be processed.

If you are not content with the outcome of our review, you may then apply
directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally,
the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have already exhausted the
review procedure provided by the Gambling Commission.  

The ICO can be contacted at: [3]The Information Commissioner’s Office,
Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Governance Team

Gambling Commission
Victoria Square House
Victoria Square
Birmingham B2 4BP

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this email in error please return it to the address it came from
indicating that you are not the intended recipient and delete it from your
system. Do not copy, distribute or take action based on this email.
Freedom of Information requests can be submitted either by email
([email address]) or by writing to: FOI request Gambling
Commission Victoria Square House Victoria Square Birmingham B2 4BP Please
clearly state that your request is under the Freedom of Information Act.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #810827 email]
2. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...
3. https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/