The Autorité nationale des jeux (ANJ), France's gambling authority, has levied a €500,000 fine, equivalent to $572,797, against an online betting operator identified as Company X, for failing to adequately recognize and assist customers showing signs of problematic gambling behavior.
This penalty was announced on Thursday, following an inquiry that revealed Company X did not properly identify 29 high-risk gamblers. Out of these, six players were completely overlooked, while 23 others were incorrectly classified as lower risk.
The investigation, which took place between October 1, 2023, and March 31, 2024, focused on Company X’s data stored in a secure vault known as the "coffre-fort." Using a scoring system that assessed multiple indicators like deposit frequency, betting intensity, loss patterns, and self-exclusion history, the ANJ pinpointed the 30 players with the highest risk levels. Notably, 29 of these were at the center of formal complaints made by the ANJ.
Additionally, Company X failed to provide adequate support and interventions to 25 players to help mitigate their gambling behavior.
The net losses for the 29 identified players totaled €683,355, while Company X reported net gains of €190,501.86 during the same timeframe.
The basis for the ruling stems from several legal frameworks. First, the gambling law from May 12, 2010, in conjunction with the Code de la sécurité intérieure mandates that licensed online operators detect signs of excessive gambling and offer support to the affected individuals. Furthermore, the non-binding ministerial framework established on April 9, 2021, outlines expected indicators for identifying at-risk players, including frequency of betting, attempts to recover losses, and adjustments to self-imposed limits.
The ANJ emphasized that the obligations to identify risky behavior and provide necessary support are separate duties, each subject to enforcement. Non-compliance in either area can lead to sanctions, irrespective of the other performance metrics.
In assessing risk during the inspection, the ANJ also considered historical data, such as voluntary self-exclusions that occurred prior to the review period. Although the 2021 framework is adaptable and does not prescribe a single detection algorithm, operators must show they are making all possible efforts to comply, including using relevant data along with the prescribed indicators.
The ANJ is enhancing its regulatory measures, recently unveiling a new algorithm in May designed to identify a larger number of potential problem gamblers than those currently reported by gambling operators.
Company X challenged the ANJ's methodology and the clarity of its legal obligations, arguing that French law lacks a precise definition of “excessive” or “pathological” gambling, making compliance ambiguous. They took issue with the application of certain indicators, such as how “completed bets” are counted and the portability of voluntary limits across reopened accounts, arguing these could lead to false positives.
The operator claimed that automated warning emails and exclusion from specific promotions, alongside temporary suspensions related to fraud, were appropriate gradual interventions. It mentioned implementing remedial actions, like enhancing its detection algorithm and broadening its player protection team. Company X pointed to a 28% drop in net losses over a 90-day period as evidence against the severity of the penalty.
However, the commission dismissed these arguments, affirming that the reference framework is clear and actionable as it is integrated into the law. The ANJ’s scoring methods and indicators were found to be suitable despite technical objections.
While acknowledging that automated emails can help reduce harm, the commission deemed these measures insufficient in most circumstances, particularly criticizing the ongoing incentivization of high-risk players through bonuses.
Company X has previously faced sanctions; in 2024, it was penalized for exceeding the statutory payout rate ceiling for 2022. Nonetheless, the commission determined that the current violations were distinct and chose not to escalate the penalty based on prior infractions.
The ruling, dated July 10, 2026, will be officially communicated to Company X, which has a two-month period to file an administrative appeal to the appropriate courts.
