FanDuel Comments on Virginia Consumer Protection Regulations (11 VAC 5-80-50 to 11 VAC 5-80-900)
11 VAC 5-80-50 Underage betting
Subsection (A) provides the ways in which a permit holder may conduct age-verification, however, the options provided do not clearly include industry standard remote “Know Your Customer” (KYC) procedures as an acceptable age-verification process. This subsection should be amended to add language authorizing standard KYC identity verification procedures. These procedures, and the independent third-party services on which they rely, are well established across multiple states that offer sports wagering and online gaming, and have proven to be effective. Virginia should ensure that it follows this well-established precedent for ensuring that only consumers 21 or over are able to wager.
“A. A permit holder shall implement age-verification procedures to verify that no sports bet is placed by or on behalf of an individual under the age of 21. Procedures for verifying an individual’s age that satisfy this requirement include:
1. Providing a verification form to be signed by the individual and returned to the permit holder by postal mail, facsimile, or electronic scan;
2. Requiring the individual, in connection with a monetary transaction, to use a credit card, debit card, or other online payment system that provides notification of each discrete transaction to the primary account holder;
3. Requiring the individual to provide personally identifiable information which can be compared to existing databases of such information to verify the individual’s identity;
4. Having the individual call a toll-free telephone number staffed by trained personnel;
4] 5. Having the individual contact trained personnel via video conferencing technology; or
5] 6. Checking a form of government-issued identification provided by the individual against databases of such information, provided that the individual's identification is deleted from the permit holder's records promptly after the verification procedure is complete.”
11 VAC 5-80-80 Corporate responsible gambling policies
Subsection (A) of this section requires permit holders to maintain an “easily visible website link to its corporate policy on responsible gaming.” Corporate policies on responsible gaming are lengthy procedural documents that are unlikely to provide relevant information to customers who are seeking assistance with a responsible gaming issue. Other states require sports betting operators to maintain a “responsible gaming” page with information on how to set individual deposit, wager, and play limits, how to self-exclude, and information on responsible gaming resources that are available in the state. By requiring an “easily visible website link” to a lengthy, verbose corporate policy that is unlikely to provide actionable information a customer is seeking on responsible gaming, this will likely only serve to confuse customers who are seeking assistance with a responsible gaming issue. If this information however is deemed necessary, then the link to the corporate policy should be one of the items on a “responsible gaming” page itself, rather than directly on the main site maintained by the permit holder.
To address the concern raised above, we suggest the following changes to 11 VAC 5-80-80(A):
“A. A permit holder shall maintain an up-to-date, easily visible website link to its corporate policy on responsible gambling on its responsible gaming page.”
11 VAC 5-80-90 Sports betting platform features
Subdivision (1) of Subsection (A) of this section requires permit holders to maintain a “prominent link to information about the permit holder’s self-exclusion program” on its sports betting platform. We agree that responsible gaming should be prioritized and prominently addressed, however, other states address this by requiring sports betting operators to maintain a “responsible gaming” page with information on how to set individual deposit, wager, and play limits, how to self-exclude, and information on responsible gaming resources that are available in the state. This is a more holistic approach to the issue of responsible gaming.
Subdivision (10) of Subsection (A) of this section as written appears to prohibit the use of cash and reloadable prepaid cards by players to deposit funds to, and withdraw funds from, their sports betting accounts. Funding accounts through the use of reloadable prepaid cards and cash have shown to be a popular option for funding sports betting accounts in other states and should be authorized in Virginia.
To address the concerns raised above, we suggest the following changes to 11 VAC 5-80-90(A):
“A. A sports betting platform must possess the following features:
1. A prominent link to the permit holder’s responsible gaming page which will contain information about the permit holder’s self-exclusion program, player self-limits, and responsible gaming resources.
Cash transfers and a] Automatic deposits are prohibited or restricted”