Disallowing winnings as a part of self-exclusion agreements /

In 2013-14, the Responsible Gambling Council (RGC) undertook a review of the practice of disallowing winnings with a view to assessing its advisability as a component of self-exclusion programs. [...] A Brief History of the Practice Canada In 2007, RGC undertook a research project into best practices for self-exclusion programs that has subsequently informed many of the self-exclusion practices in Canada.6 During the expert forum, there was a consensus that jackpot winnings should not be given to a person who is in breach of their ban. [...] By stipulating the practice in law, and specifying what happens to the money (as described below) in regulations, the jurisdiction is reinforcing that the sole purpose of the practice is to remove the incentive of winning from the list of possible reasons that a person might violate his or her self-exclusion agreement. [...] Even with all the communications efforts outlined above, it is possible that the point of signing up for self-exclusion will offer the only opportunity to provide patrons with information on how the program works, what supports are available, and what is expected from the individual who is choosing to self-exclude. [...] At the point of sign-up two elements are highlighted: a) The legal basis for the practice—this serves to illustrate the strong base for the practice, and to separate it from the specific venue or organization that administers the program.