ASA upholds William Hill complaint over promo that could encourage “irresponsible use”

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld a complaint made against William Hill over the terms and conditions of a promotion offered by the operator. 

On 3 April 2025, a player received a voucher from a slot machine at a William Hill betting shop offering a £5 cash match on any game.  

The voucher was only redeemable between 5.20pm and 11.59pm on the same day and was valid at any William Hill venue.  

The complainant alleged the specific timeframe of the offer was in breach of the CAP Code for advertising as it was “socially undesirable by encouraging irresponsible use”. 

In dialogue with ASA, William Hill insisted the ad was CAP Code-compliant.  

The evoke-owned operator said the voucher was only issued to customers who staked £50 or more on any eligible machine prior to 5.20pm on 3 April.  

William Hill claimed this was the total value of stakes placed in-store, including both the customer’s original cash-in, and any winnings that were subsequently played again. 

The bookmaker said it did not believe the spend needed to trigger the promotion was excessive, nor did it encourage extra spending.

William Hill confirmed the promotion was a “low-value, one-off reward” which lacked any progressive elements or additional conditions, meaning it wasn’t designed to encourage repeated play. The terms of the promotion were communicated clearly to the recipients, the voucher was completely optional for players to use and there was no encouragement for customers to remain on the premises, the firm added.

Further data provided by William Hill showed the majority of customers waited at least three hours to redeem the voucher, indicating “most” players left the shop and returned later to claim the reward.

William Hill highlighted that its retail staff had received training on how to identify and act upon signs of gambling-related harm, and machines in its shops displayed messages reminding customers to take breaks and set limits.

However, ASA decided to uphold the complaint, on the grounds the promotion could “encourage irresponsible use” and represent a breach of the CAP Code.

An ASA statement read: “We acknowledged William Hill’s response that the voucher was optional, that only a proportion of eligible participants redeemed it and that most participants redeemed the voucher at least three hours after they had qualified for it, all of which they believed demonstrated the redemption window of the promotion did not encourage irresponsible use.

“However, we considered that, because the redemption window was limited to a later time on the day it was printed, it meant that most participants could only benefit if they returned to the premises or stayed until the later start time.

“In addition, we noted that was reflected in the percentage breakdown of the time period between the voucher being issued and redeemed.”

ASA also took into account the gambling activity of the voucher recipients that day before they were offered the promotion.

The statement continued: “We also considered that those who were eligible for the voucher may have already placed several bets earlier that day, as the voucher was issued once an individual’s total stake reached £50, which could include repeated play of winnings.

“We therefore considered that the timeframe between when the voucher was issued and when it was redeemable created an incentive for repeated play within a short period, including visiting the betting shop twice in a single day, increasing the risk of consumers gambling more than they otherwise would.”

ASA ruled that the promotion must not appear again, warning William Hill to ensure future offers do not potentially encourage irresponsible use.

In response to the ASA ruling, a William Hill spokesperson said: “We are disappointed by the ASA’s ruling on our £5 cash match offer, as we do not believe the promotion breached the CAP Code or encouraged socially irresponsible play.

“This was a low-value, one-off reward with no progressive elements or multipliers, and the terms were communicated clearly with redemption entirely optional.

“We take player safety very seriously and encourage our players to set limits and invest in highly trained staff who know how to spot and prevent gambling-related harm.”

Earlier this month, ASA upheld a complaint made against Midnite for its use of England footballer Trent Alexander-Arnold in a social media parody.

The advertising watchdog also backed a complaint against KamaGames for publishing an ad on X which contained misleading claims about in-game purchases.

The post ASA upholds William Hill complaint over promo that could encourage “irresponsible use” first appeared on EGR Intel.

 Advertising watchdog reprimands the operator after the timeframe attached to an in-store offer was considered to incentivise repeated play in a short period of time
The post ASA upholds William Hill complaint over promo that could encourage “irresponsible use” first appeared on EGR Intel.