Rank £5m Gambling Commission settlement highlights ‘live’ land-based AML risks

Three major land-based casino operators owned by Rank Group PLC have agreed to pay a financial settlement exceeding £5 million ($6.6 million) after the Gambling Commission identified significant failings in anti-money laundering (AML) and safer-gambling controls.

Wednesday’s settlement pertained to Grosvenor Casinos Limited, Grosvenor Casinos (GC) Limited and Gaming Group Limited – all Rank Group entities operating a total of 51 casinos across Great Britain. The companies will pay £5,012,261 to the government’s consolidated fund. 

Additionally, the group has consented to a third-party audit to assess the effective implementation of AML and social responsibility policies.

AML shortcomings

The Gambling Commission initiated a licence review under Section 116 of the Gambling Act 2005 after receiving reports and intelligence concerning these operators.

A targeted compliance assessment was conducted in June 2025. The regulator’s published report revealed systemic weaknesses across both AML and safer-gambling processes.  

In its investigation the regulator laid out several anti-money laundering shortcomings. The operators had failed to update their AML policies in line with changes to the UK Money Laundering Regulations introduced in 2020.

Consequently, some customers were not appropriately classified as higher-risk.

Additionally, managers at various venues exercised discretionary decisions without clear guidance, resulting in inadequate verification of customer funds or sources of wealth.

The policies lacked clarity on handling cryptocurrency as a source of funds. Staff had accepted cryptocurrencies as legitimate once converted to sterling bank deposits, but without sufficient provenance checks.

The operators also occasionally neglected to perform enhanced due diligence where their own rules mandated it. This was particularly the case for customers such as students from high-risk jurisdictions or those exhibiting unusual funding patterns.

Safer-gambling failures

Staff did not consistently intervene with customers who demonstrated signs of gambling harm. The report cited a case where a customer lost approximately £50,000 with no recorded safer-gambling intervention.

Also noted was a long-standing customer who won around £260,000 but lost £250,000 within 12 days without any recorded protective interactions, as well as a returning customer who lost £25,000 before any intervention was initiated.

The Commission found the use of repeated low-level interventions without any assessment of their effectiveness. They also noted delayed escalation steps such as imposing gambling limits or restricting debit-card payments.

These failings breached specific licence conditions and social responsibility code provisions (LCCP), principally the duty to prevent gambling being used to facilitate crime.

Taking it on the chin

Grosvenor Casinos confirmed that it had accepted the findings and the Gambling Commission’s settlement.

Sue Young, executive director of operations at the Gambling Commission, emphasised that this enforcement action demonstrated that AML and safer-gambling risks equally applied to land-based operations as much as to online platforms. 

“Larger enforcement cases are often associated with online gambling but, as today’s announcement shows, the risks of anti-money laundering and social responsibility failures are equally alive in the land-based sector,” she noted. 

She urged other retail operators to robustly review their own compliance arrangements.

As part of its 2026 risk assessment report on AML, operator-side failings was flagged as a prominent feature by the regulator. Across multiple subsectors, the Commission also noted deficient AML/CTF policies and controls as well as poorly trained personnel. 

Rank Group’s Grosvenor Casinos Limited licence came under review for compliance issues across a period spanning 2024 and 2025. In its 2025 full year earnings call, Rank disclosed plans to include a £5 million provision in its accounts relating to a proposed regulatory settlement.  

Rank Group stated that it had promptly implemented corrective measures and fully cooperated during the Commission’s investigation. These factors were acknowledged by the regulator as mitigation in setting the resolution.