UberPokies.org

Aristocrat Pokies Promise

Unscrupulous Loan sharks prowl Crown Perth casino floor

September 29, 2021 by Admin

A recent report by a gambler at Perth’s Crown Casino revealed that he was approached by a loan shark after he had lost a few bets

The stranger’s illicit offer was a $10,000 loan, conditional on the promise that the player would refund him once he had won the money back. After accepting the offer, the player, unfortunately, was not able to repay the loan amount and now he is facing harassment and death threats. Demands for the money were accompanied by the grim promise that he would end up with “concrete boots”.

This story and others like it came to light as numerous submissions were made to the Perth Casino Royal Commission.

The commission is tasked with determining if Crown Perth should hold a casino gaming licence amid allegations of money laundering levelled at the casino. The commission has taken testimony from current and previous Crown employees and members of the Gaming and Wagering Commission (GWC), Western Australia’s casino watchdog.

Aside from the loan shark issue, electronic gaming machine limits and an inappropriate relationship between counselling services and the casino were raised as areas of concern.

Gamblers in Peril

Financial Counselling Australia (FCA) has identified a number of loan sharking incidents in or around the casino, stating that these criminal individuals appear to operate with “relative impunity”.

One story relayed by the organisation was that of a gentleman who sought out their help, describing how he owed $100 000 to “friends”.

It turns out that these so-called friends were loan sharks who charged him a 50 per cent interest rate on his borrowed amount. The player described being terrorised by the money-lending rogues, saying that he dreaded going to the police as he feared reprisals against his family.

A financial counsellor in attendance at the inquiry stated that Crown was deliberately allowing these predatory practices to continue.

“They would see someone approaching people. There are cameras everywhere. The casino should be a safe place for people to gamble,” they advised.

The FCA director of policy and campaigns, Lauren Levin, named loan sharking as one of the organisation’s priorities.

“Casinos are not allowed to provide credit. That’s been banned for a long time. Turning a blind eye to those who are providing credit to customers is a form of willful blindness,” she said.

A Criminal History

When quizzed by the commission about the issue, Brian Lee, the Crown Perth general manager of security and surveillance, defended the venue’s efforts. He advised that the casino had instituted measures to eliminate suspected loan sharks from the property.

“Most of the time [the ban is] a minimum of two years before they can write to me to ask for revocation. In most instances, the vast majority if not all, that’s extended past the two-year period,” he said.

When asked about a particular individual accused of Loan Sharking, that the commission identified as Patron S, he relayed that due to police concerns and its own evidence, Crown had banned Patron S in 2020.

It was revealed, however, that this patron’s undesirable behaviour had been reported to relevant authorities 11 years earlier. A customer complaint dated 2009 detailed how Patron S was stalking the casino’s VIP Pearl Room and this account was verified by a second witness.

It was revealed that Crown’s security and surveillance team had around 18 different notifications regarding Patron S and loan sharking from 2013-2015.

Oversight Needed

In its submission, the FCA recommended that casinos should be involved in the national self-exclusion register, due to be launched in 2022.

The FCA’s Lauren Levin additionally suggested a reform of the existing casino regulation system, that she called a “lame duck”.

“It doesn’t have the tools, it doesn’t have the regulation, it doesn’t have the desire. The time for self-regulation is over, the most important change we want to see is a single national gambling regulator with new legislation that has consumer protection at its core.”

“By having a national regulator, you get rid of that conflict of interest and the regulator will be able to do its job,” she said.

Help Needed

Western Australia’s only dedicated problem gambler counselling service, Centrecare, reported a 25 per cent increase in requests for help over the past year.

The service advised the inquiry that a public awareness campaign to address the stigma of gambling addiction and endorse support services would be of immeasurable value.

In his comments, Centrecare director Tony Pietropiccolo said, “Gambling harm is real [and] it creates problems not just for the individual but for their families and their partners. It’s a community issue because the consequences are significant.”

A large portion of the casino’s revenue is derived from problem gamblers making use of its 2,500 electronic gaming machines.

Pietropiccolo proposed a system that would allow for the pre-programming of machines with a maximum total bet amount per player.

“I think that is possibly the most effective way of allowing people to have access to what some people consider as entertainment [while still controlling] the impact of those machines on their lives,” he offered.

Conflict of Interest

Centrecare currently draws all the funding for its counselling service from voluntary contributions from Crown and other industry bodies via their WA Problem Gambling Support Services Committee memberships. The committee was first created in 1995 and operates within the GWC.

The Alliance for Gambling Reform relayed its concerns about this arrangement to the inquiry in a formal submission, an excerpt of which reads,

“We note the distress and the anger … caused amongst people with lived experience of gambling harm, that the organisations primarily responsible for causing the harm are also directly involved in consideration of the funding and provision of services to ‘support’ them. We do not believe that this is an appropriate membership of the committee.”

There have been many calls for support services to rather be backed by gambling taxes and for the committee to be operated beyond the mandate of the Gaming and Wagering Commission.​

Filed Under: Australian Gambling

  • Aristocrat
  • Microgaming
Pokie Reviews
5 Dragons Pokie
50 Dragons
50 Lions
Big Ben
Big Red
Chilli Gold
Choy Sun Doa
Dolphin Treasure
Emperor's Treasure
Let's Go Fish'n
Pompeii
Queen of the Nile II
Red Baron
Warewolf Wild
Where's the Gold
Wild Panda
Zorro
Pokie Reviews
108 Heroes
Alaskan Fishing
Ariana Pokie
Asian Beauty
Avalon Pokie
Bar Bar Black Sheep
Basketball Star
Big Top
Break Away
Break Da Bank
Burning Desire
Castle Builder
Cricket Star
Deco Diamonds
Dragon's Myth
Emperor of the Sea
Fortunium
Gold Factory
Hitman
Immortal Romance
Isis
King Tusk
Ladies Night
Lions Pride
Lucky Little Gods
Lucky Twins
Mad Hatters
Mayan Princess
Mega Fortune Dreams
Mega Moolah
MegaSpin Break da Bank Again
Mermaid Millions
Rugby Star
Starlight Kisses
Thunderstruck II
Casino Reviews
Uptown Pokies
Sloto'Cash
Fair Go
Royal Vegas
Spin Palace
All Slots
Euro Palace
Pokies Guide
Understanding RTP & Slot Variance
Aristocrat Pokies
5 vs 3 Reels Pokies
Real Money Pokies
How to Win on Pokies
Pokies Deposit Options
Legal Casinos
Aristocrat Slot Machines
Download Aristocrat Pokies
Gambling News
Spin Palace Pokies
POPULAR PAGES Pokies For Real Money
Deposit Options
Win at Pokies
Aristocrat Pokie Machines

UBER POKIES About Us
Responsible Gambling
Contact Us
CASINO REVIEWS Royal Vegas Casino
Spin Palace Casino
All Slots Casino
Euro Palace Casino

POKIE REVIEWS 5 Dragons Slot Machine
Where's The Gold Slot Machine
Big Red Slot Machine
Aristocrat Pokies Sites are Secure and Verified