Straight from the horse’s wallet

The Cheltenham Gold Cup steeplechase takes place at 3.20pm today, and it seemed an auspicious day on which to raise a long-standing question of mine: why are bookies not covered by the Money Laundering Regulations?  I know that if you bring a new sector into the regulated group, you have to provide them with a supervisory body that can check their compliance with the regulations (hence the ongoing reluctance to bring hawala dealers into the fold), but surely the vulnerabilities of bookies – and their attractiveness to criminals – should override this?

I am not the only one to think this – as shown by this article from the Telegraph back in January 2005.  To quote from that article (in case you’re wondering why criminals would risk their money by betting it): “By placing wagers totalling £12,700 on the outcome of a Premiership football match, and taking the best odds from Ladbrokes and William Hill to cover every outcome, the backer would be guaranteed a return of £11,700.  Although entailing a loss of £1,000, this represents less than 8% of the original cash.  Criminals are usually believed to be willing to accept a loss of 20-25% in converting ‘dirty’ to ‘clean’ money.  By using more than one bookmaker, slightly better odds are achieved and suspicion is averted.”  As if to prove the report right, only two months later Dublin’s Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB) was warning bookies at Cheltenham to be on the lookout for punters trying to launder the proceeds of Belfast’s £26.5 million Northern Bank robbery.  Felix McKenna, chief of the CAB, said: “What better place to launder dirty money than the races?  Cheltenham is an ideal venue to put £500 or £1,000 of cash on a horse to clean it up.  They will be there in their dozens.”  Indeed.

This entry was posted in Money laundering, Organised crime, Supervision and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Straight from the horse’s wallet

  1. Keith Hood says:

    I wonder what the odds are for bookies being brought into the scope of the ML Regs? Might be worth a bet!

  2. Keith, I am strangely tempted by this! I might just pop into my local Ladbrokes… Actually, I haven’t been into a bookies since I was seven. My great-uncle was a gambler, and eventually promised his sister (my gran) that he would never again set foot over the threshold of a bookies. He kept his word by writing down his bets, and sending me in with the money!
    Best wishes from Susan

  3. Pingback: Missing presumed safe | I hate money laundering

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.