Did bet365 Contribute to a 19-Year-Old UK Gambler’s Death?

(AsiaGameHub) –   An inquest held this week into the death of Arthur Soames concluded that the 19-year-old died by suicide, after mental health distress was exacerbated by gambling. In the months leading up to his passing, Soames gambled excessively online at bet365, prompting questions over how the gambling operator could have intervened in this case.

The West London Coroner’s Court heard that Soames first opened his Bet365 account in June 2020, shortly after his 18th birthday, the legal minimum age for gambling in the UK. Initially, he placed infrequent bets on football, but starting in December 2021, he began playing online casino games including roulette and blackjack.

In a press statement, Leigh Day, the legal firm representing Soames’ family in the case, said: “Over the following two months, the amount of time and money Arthur spent gambling rose sharply. His gambling sessions grew longer, often taking place in the early hours of the morning, which is a widely recognised indicator of gambling harm.”

bet365 sent more than 80 marketing messages to the student, with only one single warning email sent. Dan Webster from Leigh Day said the company should have taken far more action.

He commented: “Arthur’s gambling activity on bet365 showed a number of clear indicators of harm that the inquest heard should have been identified, and should have prompted further engagement and intervention to address Arthur’s gambling.”

Arthur’s Account Was in a Net Winning Position

A spokesperson for bet365 responded: “This is an incredibly tragic and complex case, and our thoughts and condolences remain with Arthur’s family and friends. bet365 strives for the highest safer gambling standards and consistently reviews and updates our procedures, including over the last five years. We will now take time to consider the inquest’s findings, and we once again extend our sincere condolences to Arthur’s family and friends.”

During the inquest, the company pushed back against the claim that gambling caused his death, noting that his account was in a net winning position. They argued other factors caused the stress that contributed to Arthur’s struggles.

Leigh Day said the sheer volume of bets should have triggered a safety alert; Arthur placed 1,600 wagers in the months leading up to his death. In January 2022, The Times reported he wagered £13,000 ($17,000). It was never disclosed how much of that sum he lost, but on the day of his death, he lost seven casino bets in a row, doubling his stake each time.

Coroner Ian Arrow said this “exhausted all viable funds and credit” available to him. He added: “He told his friends ‘I have lost everything.’ In my view, he lost more than just funds. He lost his financial and social standing. I accept the evidence that his depression reinforced his gambling, and his gambling reinforced his depression.”

Calls for Greater Protection for Young Gamblers

Arthur’s family has called on the UK to introduce new measures to protect gamblers from harm. His mother, Isabelle Soames, stated: “We are now calling on the Gambling Commission to introduce greater protection, particularly for young people, and to prevent gambling operators from offering them free bets or cross-selling them highly addictive casino products.”

The UK has already introduced some measures to curb problem gambling, including a stake limit for online slots. However, these changes have not reduced the total amount of money lost on these games.

UK gamblers wagered more than £25.7 billion ($35 billion) on slots over the three months ending late last year, up from £24 billion ($32 billion) in the same period in 2024.

“We believe the Commission should require operators to use a tailored risk detection system for Arthur’s age group, focusing more on the frequency of bets, the length of gambling sessions, and the time of day when gambling takes place, with night-time gambling classified as a high risk indicator – rather than only focusing on amounts of money lost,” said Isabelle Soames. “We believe only by introducing these protections can more young lives like Arthur’s be saved from tragic loss.”

In previous cases, the UK Gambling Commission has issued heavy fines to operators that fail to meet their safeguarding responsibilities. In Soames’ case, however, the regulator has not released the results of its investigation into bet365. If Arthur’s account was indeed net positive, as the company claims, this may clear the operator of any wrongdoing that would lead to penalties.

Webster said this demonstrates the gambling regulator’s failures, stating: “Not for the first time, this gives rise to serious questions about the Commission’s fitness for purpose as a regulator tasked with protecting the public from gambling harm and investigating operators’ conduct in these most serious cases.”

The Case Highlights Multiple Systemic Failures

While bet365 and the Gambling Commission may bear some responsibility for their lack of intervention, the case also highlighted failures in the UK’s mental health support system and a widespread lack of attention to problem gambling.

As his family grew increasingly worried about his well-being, Arthur sought help from his doctor. Initial mental health screenings included no questions about gambling. When he eventually told mental health services that he was spending large amounts of time and money gambling, no action was taken to support him.

“Their communication was not good,” said his mother. “We didn’t know how bad things had gotten, and we had no idea of the level of risk Arthur faced.”

Arthur’s family had no awareness of his gambling habit and only learned the full extent of it after his death. His mother added: “I was so shocked when I saw his betting history. It was just one bet after another. I had no idea this was happening.”