nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Betting Transaction on Bank Statement

ChrisWeiland

I understand that mortgage lenders frown upon (and understably so) any form of betting activity on a potential customers bank statements.

6 months ago i placed a €50 deposit into an online bookmakers in order to place one single future political wager.

This is the one and only transaction of that nature on my account

Will this be a problem when seeking mortgage approval?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Captain Flaps

What kind of transaction, what kind of amount and how long ago? If it's not too recent you might be worth waiting until you're past the 6 month mark, banks generally only ask for statements stretching this far back. Generally yes they seem to take a VERY dim view even if you've been playing the lotto online, but if it's a small amount as a once off you might be ok.

ChrisWeiland

6 months ago i placed a €50 deposit into an online bookmakers in order to place one single future political wager

DubJJ

Captain Flaps wrote: »

What kind of transaction, what kind of amount and how long ago? If it's not too recent you might be worth waiting until you're past the 6 month mark, banks generally only ask for statements stretching this far back. Generally yes they seem to take a VERY dim view even if you've been playing the lotto online, but if it's a small amount as a once off you might be ok.

Talk about scaremongering, of course they'll be ok, it was a one off transaction for a small amount several months ago.
Also the bank don't care if you're playing the lotto as long as it's small amounts and you're not acting like aa addict.

Captain Flaps

DubJJ wrote: »

Talk about scaremongering, of course they'll be ok, it was a one off transaction for a small amount several months ago.
Also the bank don't care if you're playing the lotto as long as it's small amounts and you're not acting like aa addict.

Everything I've been told by my broker, people I know in the industry and a couple of friends who went through the process suggests otherwise.

Anyway, it was 6 months ago. OP, just wait for your next statement and don't worry.

Grumpypants

Just wait a few weeks and it will be 7 months ago and they won't see it.

But yeah any sign of an online betting account can scupper you unless they really want your business.

Dumb really as you could take out 50 euro and walk into a bookies.

ChrisWeiland

Grumpypants wrote: »

Dumb really as you could take out 50 euro and walk into a bookies.

I agree

Browney7

ChrisWeiland wrote: »

I agree

If it's a bookie on a high street yes but if the price was significantly better with an online only bookie you'd be foolish not to take it (OT over)

Ursus Horribilis

A once off transaction probably won't be an issue. It's spending patterns they're looking at.

theronca

Hate to read this kind of story as an expat thinking of coming home. The kind of nosy-parker paternalism that makes me want to run a mile....

Samuel T. Cogley

theronca wrote: »

Hate to read this kind of story as an expat thinking of coming home. The kind of nosy-parker paternalism that makes me want to run a mile....

Did a massive recession fuelled by irresponsible lending not make you run several miles in the first place?

theronca

No. I left long before that. Plenty of irresponsible lending here in CA too, but the recovery doesn't included line-item reviews of people's banking statements.
Reminds me of the 5 star Dublin hotel I had to cancel last month with a clear 24 hour cancellation policy. And yet upon cancelling, I couldn't just cancel. I needed to give the "reason why" I was cancelling and have my reason "reviewed" before the cancellation as approved.. More nosy-parker paternalism.
Anyway, don't want to hijack ChrisWeiland's thread any further.

Samuel T. Cogley

theronca wrote: »

No. I left long before that. Plenty of irresponsible lending here in CA too, but the recovery doesn't included line-item reviews of people's banking statements.
Reminds me of the 5 star Dublin hotel I had to cancel last month with a clear 24 hour cancellation policy. And yet upon cancelling, I couldn't just cancel. I needed to give the "reason why" I was cancelling and have my reason "reviewed" before the cancellation as approved.. More nosy-parker paternalism.
Anyway, don't want to hijack ChrisWeiland's thread any further.

Thinly veiled I stay in nice Hotels post :pac:

Quite right, no more messing from me either.

theronca

Well, take it that way if you want.
I said "5 star" simply to indicate that one would expect more professionalism from a "nice" hotel when it came to following their own policies. I've never had that happen at any other 5 star I've stayed anywhere else in the world (take that how you want, too.)

What Username Guidelines

Anecdotal, but I had been playing the lotto at €22 a week (syndicate amongst friends at €2 a pop) for about a year, just due to the convenience of playing online. Didn’t think much of it but when I went to change banks I did worry a little as it’s pretty much the same as a new mortgage application. Nothing was said about it at all, even at that amount and frequency. I’m sure plenty of people throw €20/€50 into an online bookies account around big sporting events.

EdgeCase

Unless someone's gambling to a level that they're putting their payment ability at risk, that is incredibly intrusive.

Do the banks make it clear that they are processing this data to make judgements on the type of spending that someone is doing?

The GDPR legislation will certainly make organisations need to be a lot more transparent about what data they're processing and why.

Captain Flaps

EdgeCase wrote: »

Do the banks make it clear that they are processing this data to make judgements on the type of spending that someone is doing?

The GDPR legislation will certainly make organisations need to be a lot more transparent about what data they're processing and why.

I don't think you understand what GDPR is mate. You're asking for a loan and consenting for the banks to look at your financial history, of course they're within their rights to refuse you for any reason - they're not transmitting that info or storing it somewhere else.

I was refused a loan about 8 years ago and it was explained very transparently why I'd not been approved and what I could do to get myself into a position where I would be.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Captain Flaps wrote: »

Everything I've been told by my broker, people I know in the industry and a couple of friends who went through the process suggests otherwise.

Anyway, it was 6 months ago. OP, just wait for your next statement and don't worry.

I’m sure I had online lotto statements all over my statements and that was 3 years ago.

witchgirl26

OP as others said if it's a once off transaction and a history not showing repeated, they might question it but I don't think it'll cause a major issue. Also the idea of just waiting a few weeks so it drops off the 6 month history isn't a bad one.

I had transactions for the lotto on my statements and the most that was asked about them was if I played frequently or not. When I said that I topped up once every 4-5 months and usually for a specific draw, there was no further comments and no issues.

Asus X540L

I play a lot of online poker and I'm well up overall but statement would have a lot of deposits but more withdrawals from pokerstars.

Would they even do the maths here see I'm a winner or do they just see the pokerstars and throw your application in the bin?

Doubt you'd have much reception from them trying to explain poker isn't really gambling either

ANXIOUS

Asus X540L wrote: »

I play a lot of online poker and I'm well up overall but statement would have a lot of deposits but more withdrawals from pokerstars.

Would they even do the maths here see I'm a winner or do they just see the pokerstars and throw your application in the bin?

Doubt you'd have much reception from them trying to explain poker isn't really gambling either

Would you not set up a revoult account for the likes of this?

witchgirl26

Asus X540L wrote: »

I play a lot of online poker and I'm well up overall but statement would have a lot of deposits but more withdrawals from pokerstars.

Would they even do the maths here see I'm a winner or do they just see the pokerstars and throw your application in the bin?

Doubt you'd have much reception from them trying to explain poker isn't really gambling either

I don't think they'd do the maths but they might listen to an explanation. That said poker is gambling and to them the risk is that, while you're winning now, that might not always be the case and it puts your ability to pay the loan back in jeopardy.

EdgeCase

Captain Flaps wrote: »

I don't think you understand what GDPR is mate. You're asking for a loan and consenting for the banks to look at your financial history, of course they're within their rights to refuse you for any reason - they're not transmitting that info or storing it somewhere else.

I was refused a loan about 8 years ago and it was explained very transparently why I'd not been approved and what I could do to get myself into a position where I would be.

Neither do you "mate".

It has serious implications for any organisation gathering information for one purpose, in this case managing your account then using it for another, in this case using metadata about who transactions were with to assess spending patterns.

All I'm saying is it could get interesting when it's fully implemented as they would need to seek specific consent to do this while you're applying and make it clear how and why they will be using that data.

For example, accessing and using someone's in-house transaction history without explicit consent isn't legal under the GDPR.

keane2097

Mentioned elsewhere also, had well in excess of six figures through my AIB accounts in and out of various sports betting sites in the year or two prior to applying for mortgage and wasn't even asked about it. We are due to draw down in the next couple of weeks.

The bet on the Grand National preventing an otherwise in order application from being accepted just has to be nonsense, it's not credible.

EdgeCase

They shouldn't really need to know more than your income is stable and that you have enough disposable income to cover the mortgage payments.

There have been a few articles in papers suggesting that it's the bank auditing the intimate details of every transaction.

It would also be hugely intrusive and potentially quite embarrassing these days as the history on your bank account can reveal a lot. For example, it's not unusual to pay medical consultants by card and all you have to do is Google the name and you know what speciality they are and could make all sorts of assumptions about someone's health.

Your current account and credit card can reveal a hell of a lot about you. They're probably as or more significant a trail of metadata than your phone records or Facebook history, particularly if you're someone who pays everything by tapping your card / phone.

There's a lot more data being captured the more we use cards. Even when cheques were common the data about who they were paid to wasn't easy to see and if you go back even a couple of decades ago, the majority of small transactions were cash. So most accounts didn't really reveal that you had a major coffee habit, or spent a few quid at the bookies or pub.

That's where the GDPR becomes relevant.

El Weirdo

As an aside, when a friend of mine was applying for his mortgage, he was questioned on a small monthly subscription/donation to the Irish Communist Party. He explained that he'd set it up years previously when he was younger and had basically forgotten about it, and asked if it would affect his application.

The bank manager replied, "No. But I wouldn't book a holiday to America for a while".

Earleybird

Asus X540L wrote: »

I play a lot of online poker and I'm well up overall but statement would have a lot of deposits but more withdrawals from pokerstars.

Would they even do the maths here see I'm a winner or do they just see the pokerstars and throw your application in the bin?

Doubt you'd have much reception from them trying to explain poker isn't really gambling either

Made the same point to a bank many years ago who were concerned about the volume of transactions with an online betting company. "But look at all the withdrawals" I responded. The meeting ended briskly. It's behavioural patterns they're looking to identify. The odd bet here and there won't impact an application.

Captain Flaps

EdgeCase wrote: »

Neither do you "mate".

It has serious implications for any organisation gathering information for one purpose, in this case managing your account then using it for another, in this case using metadata about who transactions were with to assess spending patterns.

All I'm saying is it could get interesting when it's fully implemented as they would need to seek specific consent to do this while you're applying and make it clear how and why they will be using that data.

For example, accessing and using someone's in-house transaction history without explicit consent isn't legal under the GDPR.

If you're applying for a mortgage you submit 6 months bank statements to be assessed, they're not 'accessing without explicit consent' - they're asking for it and you're handing it to them. You could (and probably will) be dealing with a different bank to your usual one, they can't access anything of yours without your consent.

Now, if you'd expressed worry about how the documents you send over are stored and how long they're retained for then yes, I'd agree with you. What you're complaining about is nonsense though.

witchgirl26

EdgeCase wrote: »

Neither do you "mate".

It has serious implications for any organisation gathering information for one purpose, in this case managing your account then using it for another, in this case using metadata about who transactions were with to assess spending patterns.

All I'm saying is it could get interesting when it's fully implemented as they would need to seek specific consent to do this while you're applying and make it clear how and why they will be using that data.

For example, accessing and using someone's in-house transaction history without explicit consent isn't legal under the GDPR.

If you're applying for a loan or mortgage with a bank that already holds your accounts, they will have to ask for consent to look at those accounts as part of your application. You agreeing to that counts as consent under GDPR and they will be allowed to look through those for the purposes of assessing you for a loan.

If it's a bank other than your normal one, the request for you to send the statements and the sending of same, can be considered consent also for the purposes of them assessing those statements as part of your application.

The banks have to be allowed to assess the data given otherwise they won't be able to determine the risk profile of the individual for a loan/mortgage. For example - I get a good wage but I'm terrible at saving it or I end up in overdraft every month because I like to shop. The bank has to be able to take that into consideration.

They will run metrics on the data to determine your viability but under GDPR they will have to tell you that they are doing this along with where the data is stored and whether there is anything else they will use it for.

Cape Clear

ANXIOUS wrote: »

Would you not set up a revoult account for the likes of this?

Do banks request statment/info on these accounts?

lawred2

theronca wrote: »

No. I left long before that. Plenty of irresponsible lending here in CA too, but the recovery doesn't included line-item reviews of people's banking statements.
Reminds me of the 5 star Dublin hotel I had to cancel last month with a clear 24 hour cancellation policy. And yet upon cancelling, I couldn't just cancel. I needed to give the "reason why" I was cancelling and have my reason "reviewed" before the cancellation as approved.. More nosy-parker paternalism.
Anyway, don't want to hijack ChrisWeiland's thread any further.

wasn't really relevant was it?