Homepage
PR Newswire
25-09-2010, 02:11 PM
The scourge of problem gambling and gambling addiction may already be upon us......very sad stories such as these are emerging on a weekly basis. 
Sat, Sep 25, 2010
The New Paper
RWS casino tells gambler: Give back your winnings
By Chong Shin Yen
HE DECIDED to call it a night after winning some money at Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) casino.
But on his way out, Mr Teo Thiam Kee, 67, had a shock - he was told to empty his pockets and forfeit his winnings.
This was when he found out that the exclusion order barring him from the casinos here had kicked in.
Mr Teo told The New Paper that he knew his son had applied for an exclusion order. But as he was not told when the order would take effect, he continued going to RWS.
The retired cabby said in Mandarin: "I'd won about $200 but they made me cough up the money before I was allowed to leave.
"This is unfair. They allowed me to enter but took away my winnings."
Mr Teo's son, 31, applied for a family exclusion order earlier this month after his father lost more than $100,000 at the gambling tables in less than six months.
The man, accompanied by his family, appeared before the committee of assessors at the Family Link@Lengkok Bahru on Sept 8. The committee hears cases before deciding whether to grant the exclusion order.
After the session ended in the evening, Mr Teo headed straight to RWS. He did the same thing over the next few days as he was told that it would take some time for the order to be granted.
But he was "caught" when he scanned his identity card to exit the casino on Sept 11 at about 7.30am.
The habitual gambler had entered the casino at about 11.45pm the night before and played baccarat and the dice game "big-small" - the only two games he played.
Said Mr Teo: "I didn't know I had to forfeit my winnings. If I knew, I wouldn't have gone there."
He surrendered his $200 winnings, but not before arguing with the staff.
When contacted, an RWS spokesman, Ms Lee Sin Yee, said the exclusion order for Mr Teo showed up in the system at the time of his exit and not when he entered.
Mr Teo claimed that he received a letter informing him that the exclusion order had been granted only after he returned home that day. It was delivered by hand. The letter from the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) was dated Sept 9.
The New Paper understands that notification of the exclusion order is sent by courier to the respondent. Once the notice is issued, the exclusion order will be deemed effective, regardless of whether the respondent has received it.
So it is possible for a gambler to be in the casino and be unaware that the order has taken effect.
The NCPG updates the list of people who have been placed on exclusion orders.
Under the Casino Control Act, an excluded person or those below the age of 21 must forfeit their winnings if they are caught in the casinos here. The forfeited money goes into the Government Consolidated Fund.
If a gambler loses?
But if a gambler on an exclusion order has lost money, would the amount be returned to him?
Lawyer Foo Cheow Ming said: "There is no direct answer on this point. It remains to be seen whether the Casino Regulatory Authority would permit the casino to retain the losses from an excluded gambler."
The latest figures from the NCPG show that 123 family exclusion orders had been issued up to June. As for self-exclusion applications, 1,546 were received.
Mr Teo said he had been visiting RWS practically every day since April.
The man, who retired last December said: "I tried watching television at home but I felt I would suffer from dementia just sitting in front of the screen. I was lonely and didn't know what else to do."
MrTeo's wife works in a hotel and his two grown-up children are working.
In April, he told his son that he wanted to visit the casino in Genting, Malaysia.
But "he told me that I need not have to go so far" and pointed him to RWS, said Mr Teo. That was how he started gambling.
At first, Mr Teo paid the $100 levy each time he went to the casino at RWS. But after forking out $800 in less than a month, he bought the $2,000 annual pass.
"I could lose up to $20,000 a day.When I lost money, I had a black face when I got home and my family would know," he said.
Repeated pleas from his family to stop gambling fell on deaf ears.
His wife and daughter were so upset with him that they moved out to live with his son last month.
Describing his relationship with his family now as "cold", he said they had contacted him only a few times since they moved out.
Mr Teo insisted: "I'm not addicted to gambling, I went to the casino to while away my time."
But he admitted "feeling the pain of losing so much money". He estimated his losses at more than $100,000, part of which were his savings from winning 4-D.
Over 16 years, he said, he won more than $500,000 by betting on the numbers 1757, the licence plate number of the taxi he drove.
At his three-room flat in Rochor, Mr Teo proudly showed us newspaper clippings of the 4-D results. His wins included two first prizes and two third prizes. The biggest wins were in 1998 and 1994, when he won $300,000 and $80,000 respectively.
"I put all my winnings into a fixed deposit account," said Mr Teo.
"Over the years, I spent some money on renovations and my children's education. When my son got married last year, I gave him $80,000 for his down payment for his new flat."
Today, he has about $30,000 left.He still bets on 4-D, hoping for another windfall with his "lucky" number.
Now that he has been banned from the casinos, Mr Teo goes on cruise ships to gamble.
"Time passes by quickly when I'm there and they provide three free meals," he said.
"Most importantly, there are no ATMs on the ship, so I can control myself better."
Exclusion order doesn't mean end of addiction
JUST because a family member has been slapped with a casino exclusion order does not mean he will stop gambling.
A problem gambler desperate for a flutter can easily turn to other avenues to feed his craving.
And he often does, counsellors and Members of Parliament (MPs) told The New Paper.
A single woman in her 40s turned to MP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC Charles Chong for help a few weeks ago.
She had cashed out her monthly salary of $3,000 the day she received her pay - and lost it all on jackpot machines at a club in just five hours.
That, despite the help she had received.
The woman, who has been struggling with a gambling addiction since young, was barred from entering the casinos here after her family took out an exclusion order against her, Mr Chong said.
She had also been getting treatment for her addiction since the end of last year.
But she couldn't shake the compulsion.
"She still found ways to gamble by playing the jackpot machines at clubs and she did it regularly," said Mr Chong.
Her case shows that "you don't really need the casinos to lure people to gamble", he said, adding, "They can always find other places to do so."
This point was also raised by senior counsellor Charles Lee, who's in charge of the problem gambling counselling programme at the Tanjong Pagar Family Service Centre (FSC).
Sometimes, all it takes is a trigger to set the recovering gambler off,he said.
Bad influences
One professional in his early 30s was undone by the opening of the casinos here and the influence of bad company.
"He had been stable for 24 months and was still receiving counselling," Mr Lee said.
"But he mixed with an active gambler who took him to the casino."
The man paid a hefty price for that relapse - he lost $130,000 in two days in March.
There was no exclusion order imposed on him as his family did not think he would succumb. Even when he did, they did not apply for one.
"He promised them he wouldn't do it again," Mr Lee said.
But not every family has such faith.
Families plagued by loved ones with gambling problems contact Tanjong Pagar's FSC, the only one appointed by the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) to handle applications for family exclusion orders.
The FSC counsels and interviews both the applicant and the respondent - the problem gambler.
"We play a neutral role in gathering the information, giving both parties equal opportunities to speak, then write the report which we submit to the NCPG," said Mr Lee.
Anger and denial
A committee of assessors from the Council decides whether to grant the application.
The entire process can take up to six weeks.
Mr Lee has come across a range of reactions in his interviews with respondents.
"Some are angry, some are in denial, some object to the application. Others are cooperative and agreeable," he said.
Exclusion order or not, what is more crucial is that the gambler, with his family's help, bounces back from a relapse.
"The gambler must return for treatment. Don't think that the treatment doesn't work," said Mr Lee.
Relapses are part of the recovery process, which is "not a straight line graph", he added.
In all, the road to recovery can take between five and 10 years. Above all, the gambler must have the willpower to change.
"It's not an overnight thing. You must fight the craving every day," he said.
Sat, Sep 25, 2010
The New Paper
RWS casino tells gambler: Give back your winnings
By Chong Shin Yen
HE DECIDED to call it a night after winning some money at Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) casino.
But on his way out, Mr Teo Thiam Kee, 67, had a shock - he was told to empty his pockets and forfeit his winnings.
This was when he found out that the exclusion order barring him from the casinos here had kicked in.
Mr Teo told The New Paper that he knew his son had applied for an exclusion order. But as he was not told when the order would take effect, he continued going to RWS.
The retired cabby said in Mandarin: "I'd won about $200 but they made me cough up the money before I was allowed to leave.
"This is unfair. They allowed me to enter but took away my winnings."
Mr Teo's son, 31, applied for a family exclusion order earlier this month after his father lost more than $100,000 at the gambling tables in less than six months.
The man, accompanied by his family, appeared before the committee of assessors at the Family Link@Lengkok Bahru on Sept 8. The committee hears cases before deciding whether to grant the exclusion order.
After the session ended in the evening, Mr Teo headed straight to RWS. He did the same thing over the next few days as he was told that it would take some time for the order to be granted.
But he was "caught" when he scanned his identity card to exit the casino on Sept 11 at about 7.30am.
The habitual gambler had entered the casino at about 11.45pm the night before and played baccarat and the dice game "big-small" - the only two games he played.
Said Mr Teo: "I didn't know I had to forfeit my winnings. If I knew, I wouldn't have gone there."
He surrendered his $200 winnings, but not before arguing with the staff.
When contacted, an RWS spokesman, Ms Lee Sin Yee, said the exclusion order for Mr Teo showed up in the system at the time of his exit and not when he entered.
Mr Teo claimed that he received a letter informing him that the exclusion order had been granted only after he returned home that day. It was delivered by hand. The letter from the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) was dated Sept 9.
The New Paper understands that notification of the exclusion order is sent by courier to the respondent. Once the notice is issued, the exclusion order will be deemed effective, regardless of whether the respondent has received it.
So it is possible for a gambler to be in the casino and be unaware that the order has taken effect.
The NCPG updates the list of people who have been placed on exclusion orders.
Under the Casino Control Act, an excluded person or those below the age of 21 must forfeit their winnings if they are caught in the casinos here. The forfeited money goes into the Government Consolidated Fund.
If a gambler loses?
But if a gambler on an exclusion order has lost money, would the amount be returned to him?
Lawyer Foo Cheow Ming said: "There is no direct answer on this point. It remains to be seen whether the Casino Regulatory Authority would permit the casino to retain the losses from an excluded gambler."
The latest figures from the NCPG show that 123 family exclusion orders had been issued up to June. As for self-exclusion applications, 1,546 were received.
Mr Teo said he had been visiting RWS practically every day since April.
The man, who retired last December said: "I tried watching television at home but I felt I would suffer from dementia just sitting in front of the screen. I was lonely and didn't know what else to do."
MrTeo's wife works in a hotel and his two grown-up children are working.
In April, he told his son that he wanted to visit the casino in Genting, Malaysia.
But "he told me that I need not have to go so far" and pointed him to RWS, said Mr Teo. That was how he started gambling.
At first, Mr Teo paid the $100 levy each time he went to the casino at RWS. But after forking out $800 in less than a month, he bought the $2,000 annual pass.
"I could lose up to $20,000 a day.When I lost money, I had a black face when I got home and my family would know," he said.
Repeated pleas from his family to stop gambling fell on deaf ears.
His wife and daughter were so upset with him that they moved out to live with his son last month.
Describing his relationship with his family now as "cold", he said they had contacted him only a few times since they moved out.
Mr Teo insisted: "I'm not addicted to gambling, I went to the casino to while away my time."
But he admitted "feeling the pain of losing so much money". He estimated his losses at more than $100,000, part of which were his savings from winning 4-D.
Over 16 years, he said, he won more than $500,000 by betting on the numbers 1757, the licence plate number of the taxi he drove.
At his three-room flat in Rochor, Mr Teo proudly showed us newspaper clippings of the 4-D results. His wins included two first prizes and two third prizes. The biggest wins were in 1998 and 1994, when he won $300,000 and $80,000 respectively.
"I put all my winnings into a fixed deposit account," said Mr Teo.
"Over the years, I spent some money on renovations and my children's education. When my son got married last year, I gave him $80,000 for his down payment for his new flat."
Today, he has about $30,000 left.He still bets on 4-D, hoping for another windfall with his "lucky" number.
Now that he has been banned from the casinos, Mr Teo goes on cruise ships to gamble.
"Time passes by quickly when I'm there and they provide three free meals," he said.
"Most importantly, there are no ATMs on the ship, so I can control myself better."
Exclusion order doesn't mean end of addiction
JUST because a family member has been slapped with a casino exclusion order does not mean he will stop gambling.
A problem gambler desperate for a flutter can easily turn to other avenues to feed his craving.
And he often does, counsellors and Members of Parliament (MPs) told The New Paper.
A single woman in her 40s turned to MP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC Charles Chong for help a few weeks ago.
She had cashed out her monthly salary of $3,000 the day she received her pay - and lost it all on jackpot machines at a club in just five hours.
That, despite the help she had received.
The woman, who has been struggling with a gambling addiction since young, was barred from entering the casinos here after her family took out an exclusion order against her, Mr Chong said.
She had also been getting treatment for her addiction since the end of last year.
But she couldn't shake the compulsion.
"She still found ways to gamble by playing the jackpot machines at clubs and she did it regularly," said Mr Chong.
Her case shows that "you don't really need the casinos to lure people to gamble", he said, adding, "They can always find other places to do so."
This point was also raised by senior counsellor Charles Lee, who's in charge of the problem gambling counselling programme at the Tanjong Pagar Family Service Centre (FSC).
Sometimes, all it takes is a trigger to set the recovering gambler off,he said.
Bad influences
One professional in his early 30s was undone by the opening of the casinos here and the influence of bad company.
"He had been stable for 24 months and was still receiving counselling," Mr Lee said.
"But he mixed with an active gambler who took him to the casino."
The man paid a hefty price for that relapse - he lost $130,000 in two days in March.
There was no exclusion order imposed on him as his family did not think he would succumb. Even when he did, they did not apply for one.
"He promised them he wouldn't do it again," Mr Lee said.
But not every family has such faith.
Families plagued by loved ones with gambling problems contact Tanjong Pagar's FSC, the only one appointed by the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) to handle applications for family exclusion orders.
The FSC counsels and interviews both the applicant and the respondent - the problem gambler.
"We play a neutral role in gathering the information, giving both parties equal opportunities to speak, then write the report which we submit to the NCPG," said Mr Lee.
Anger and denial
A committee of assessors from the Council decides whether to grant the application.
The entire process can take up to six weeks.
Mr Lee has come across a range of reactions in his interviews with respondents.
"Some are angry, some are in denial, some object to the application. Others are cooperative and agreeable," he said.
Exclusion order or not, what is more crucial is that the gambler, with his family's help, bounces back from a relapse.
"The gambler must return for treatment. Don't think that the treatment doesn't work," said Mr Lee.
Relapses are part of the recovery process, which is "not a straight line graph", he added.
In all, the road to recovery can take between five and 10 years. Above all, the gambler must have the willpower to change.
"It's not an overnight thing. You must fight the craving every day," he said.
My Value Investing Blog: http://sgmusicwhiz.blogspot.com/