Dutch Authority Faces Probing Questions Over Withdrawal Processing Delays

In a recent parliamentary session, the Dutch Minister for Legal Protection, Franc Weerwind, faced probing questions from members of the country’s Socialist Party and Christian Union. The focus of their questions was the mandatory pending period that casinos use to delay processing withdrawal requests.

Weerwind’s responses showed a deep commitment to allowing the online gambling business to follow its processes while ensuring that local players are protected and permitted to act according to their conscience.

The Parliamentary Pain Points

When considered holistically, parliament questions mirrored those asked by players. Generally, they focused on why delays exist when withdrawals are requested, whether these are harmful and if they should be banned.

Here are the main points they raised:

1. Why does the Ksa allow casinos to apply withdrawal delays?
2. Should all providers be forced to process winnings within the same timeframe?
3. Does the message of reclaiming your money before it is paid increase the risk of gambling harm?
4. Does the “reclaim your winnings” message contradict Dutch safer gambling campaigns such as “'How much does gambling cost you?” and “Stop on time?”.
5. Should withdrawal requests be made final with no reclaim option available to players?

Understandably the member parties were trying to determine if payment delays were merely a cost-saving exercise on the part of the casino. And if in looking to save paying out the money players wanted, they were encouraging overspending and other compulsive behaviours.

 The Authority’s Praiseworthy Stance

Naturally, there is a cost-saving anytime a player chooses to have their withdrawal returned rather than being paid out. Weerwind made the case that the Gambling Act and its pursuant legislation were structured to balance various legal processes, player choice and business efficacies.

✓ Awareness and Applicability:

He confirmed that the Ksa and other governmental bodies are aware of the delays but considered them a necessary part of the customer review process, saying:

“Article 4.26 of the Remote Games of Chance Decree (Bkoa) states that the license holder credits and debits the gaming account “without undue delay”. There may be good reasons for the delay in payments.”

He added that it is up to Ksa to monitor these pending periods to determine if they fall within the bounds of industry best practices and address any overstep on a case-by-case basis.

✓ Processing Time Frames:

The minister stated that it is essential to consider what legal checks are expected of an operator when dealing with a withdrawal request. He specifically mentioned the importance of effective fraud and anti-money laundering (AML) checks. There are also wagering requirement checks and other account verifications, which can vary in time depending on the casino's size and the players' responsiveness.

These variations disallow the implementation of one standard processing time frame for all operators, with Weerwind reiterating that “without undue delay” is the standard that the Ksa upholds.

✓ Should Withdrawal Cancellations Continue?

It was refreshing to hear the minister tackle objections surrounding the reclamation of funds from a player perspective, not a business one.

Weerwind commented:

“Participants in games of chance must be able to control the amount in the gambling account. A player can request the license holder to pay the amount on the gaming account.”

The player has the right to handle their funds as they see fit, which may include initially wanting to withdraw a certain amount and then later transfer some or all of it back to their player account. He stressed that there is a duty of care that lies with the operator. Part of their risk reviews and assessments include tracking withdrawal behaviours in an attempt to highlight at-risk players.

The role of the Ksa is to ensure this process is being managed correctly. Beyond that, there is no legal or ethical reason to ban players from using their funds as they deem necessary.