When is it illegal to sell a slot machine?

[margamatix]

I'm curious to know about the legality of buying or selling a machine which does not reach its reserve at auction. Obviously it does not become illegal ever to sell such a machine, but what is the time or distance from the auction at which such a sale is not illegal?

(This topic has been edited and split from can anybody help with some paperwork??? for clarity - Site Admin)

[JC]

Margamatix, you... (Topic edited for clarity - Site Admin)... do not understand our draconian gaming laws. The issue isn't about 'how long after or away from the auction' - IT IS ALWAYS, AT ANY TIME, ANYWHERE, TOTALY ILLEGAL to sell a gaming machine. We were able to sell in the auction, on behalf of the vendor, because we were licenced to do so. Any private deals after the event were illegal because they were not covered by our licence.

[margamatix]

Well, I possibly don't understand the law then. I can understand that an Allwin could maybe be described as a game of skill, but a one-armed-bandit or a Bryan's clock couldn't possibly be and yet I see plenty on eBay being sold by private individuals.

I'm not finding fault with your position here regarding the ethics of selling outside of an auction, it must be very frustrating for you. I'm just puzzled as to the point I made above.

[JC]

Yes, it is puzzling. Someone from outer space might think he was on the wrong planet. I sometimes think I'm on the wrong planet! But selling any form of gaming machine without a licence is illegal.
As for selling on ebay, that is still illegal. Some sellers state that "payouts have been disconnected" - it makes no difference. The legislation defines a gaming machine as: 'a machine intended for gambling' (incredible definition isn't it)? so whether the payouts are disabled or not, it's still clearly a machine intended for gaming.

[margamatix]

I may be wrong- in fact it is my default position - but I thought I had read somewhere that machines operating on a stake of no more than 2p were exempt from this legislation?

[pennymachines]

The stake is only relevant with regard to operating, not selling.

The regulations on selling gaming machines remain much as described here: British Law and Vintage Coin-Operated Machines but the permit for a one-off sale is no longer free. What's more a separate permit is now required for each machine. Previously they would allow a quantity to be sold together under one permit. This is why the Coventry auction required a certificate.

[badpenny]

Hence my remark (in this thread) about the toy bandits sold in High Street shops, they don't even have a payout, they don't even take real coins, however so far as the law is concerned they are gambling machines and as such cannot be sold without a licence!!!!! Periodically the authorities have a purge on them. Don't forget it wasn't so long ago packs of cards had a stamp duty on them.
Regarding the toys and probably old machines pre decimal it's because I can say to you...
"Pay me a quid, and you can pull the handle, if you get three the same I'll pay you a fiver"
I hope to hell they never realise that a brick could also be used.
"Pay me a quid, and you can toss this brick, if it lands on its end I'll pay you a fiver". The building trade would come to a standstill.

Clearly the law is intended to catch those operating machines illegally (cafes, pubs etc.). If they aren't going to pay for a licence then they aren't likely to declare the income either.
However we are caught in the middle and I for one can see nothing in it for the Gambling Commission to reconsider our position. Likewise writing to your MP isn't going to do much it's hardly a big vote winner.

[pennymachines]

Thanks Laurence for keeping us up to speed on this. I'll be interested to hear your conclusions.

Putting aside for a moment the very real difference between ancient and modern slot machines, we should ask why these regulations exist at all. We elect our government to serve the public interest. In what way is anyone but the government and employees of their Gambling Commission served by these regulations?

This has little to do with protecting vunerable people from the dangers of gambling. Gambling in general and gaming machines in particular threaten the well-being of certain addictive personalities so it seems reasonable that there should be some regulations to protect those people. Gaming machines, after all, are designed to be addictive. But I don't see how applying levies on the sale and operating of slot machines provides this protection. On the contrary, the taxes are such a nice earner for the government they succumb to the addiction themselves (as they did to tobacco). We see them promoting gambling with supercasinos (now scotched by Brown) and the National Lottery - turning every convenience store into a betting shop and encouraging those who never gambled in their lives to get involved.

[JC]

Well, nip out to the post office for a while, and look what's happened to this thread!
Thanks for your input and support in all this Laurence - yes, I look forward to that drink after Christmas (although I'll no doubt be in touch before).
As some of you will know, Laurence and I have had discussions over the last couple of weeks with a view to exploring the feasibility of forcing a change in the law. For too long now, we've all taken the view that the law is the law and we're stuck with it. Well I for one have had enough. It's not about my right to buy and sell machines; it's not about my right to run auctions: It's about my right to pursue a hobby which does no harm to anyone. As the law stands, most of us are criminals, because most of us have sold machines at sometime - and to whom? other collectors.

Lazy Guest makes a valid point with regard to making a distinction between machines sold for commercial use (which will clearly be used for gambling), and machines sold as collectables. I smoke (a habit of which I am not particularly proud); I drink (a habit of which I am quite proud)! and I collect amusement machines - but I am not a gambler. Let's face it, die-hard gamblers probably couldn't afford to buy the machines we collect! So although I have to accept that the Police State (sorry, government) will make life difficult for me as a smoker and drinker, I don't expect to be persecuted for having a harmless interest.

[margamatix]

My argument if questioned about selling a vintage machine would be that since it was not capable of operating on legal tender or anything that could be construed as a token, that it was by definition "scrap".

Out of interest, does anyone know if a private vendor has ever been approached by the law when attempting to sell a machine?

[badpenny]

My argument if questioned about selling a vintage machine would be that since it was not capable of operating on legal tender or anything that could be construed as a token, that it was by definition "scrap".
Margamatrix ........ I refer you to the mail I posted this morning where I explain the "scrap" issue.

Out of interest, does anyone know if a private vendor has ever been approached by the law when attempting to sell a machine?

The quick answer is yes, I know of three such occassions, one of the collectors is now in the big arcade in the sky, the second one was at the auction on Sunday and wouldn't thank me for naming him. They didn't identify themselves at the beginning of their visit to his house, but encouraged him to show them photos of machines he used to own then clumsily tried to get exact details of when he sold them to whom and for how much, he smelt a rat and back-pedalled furiously. Finally I refer you again to my post of this morning, I know it was a long boring one, but the details are there.

[Brian]

You might be interested to know that 18 months ago I sent an e-mail to the culture secretary asking for guidance on this issue as a collector of old predecimal slots. After 4 months I got a reply saying, "we are dealing with your query and will be in touch soon". Another 7 months later and they replied again "We are somewhat unsure of the position you outlined and have placed the matter with legal advisors. Will respond in the near future". I intend to send the him a second birthday card awaiting reply on April 22nd 2008.

I believe we are legally OK to own predecimal machines because no legal tender is being exchanged under gambling law. Like the candle factory slot arcade in Cheshire, you can legally sell pre-decimal coins. How people use the coins they buy is up to them.

Brian

[badpenny]

You might be interested to know that 18 months ago I sent an e-mail to the culture secretary asking for guidance on this issue as a collector of old predecimal slots. After 4 months I got a reply saying, "we are dealing with your queery and will be in touch soon". Another 7 months later and they replied again "We are somewhat unsure of the position you outlined and have placed the matter with legal advisors. Will respond in the near future". I intend to send the m a second birthday card awaiting reply on April 22nd 2008.

I believe we are legally OK to own predecimal machines because no legal tender is being exchanged under gambling law. Like the candle factory slot arcade in Cheshire, you can legally sell pre-decimal coins. How people use the coins they buy is up to them.

Brian

I refer you to my post of this morning. It is not illegal to own gaming machines, It is illegal to deal in them.

[margamatix]

I refer you to my post of this morning. It is not illegal to own gaming machines, It is illegal to deal in them.

With all due respect, I disagree with you. The law does not encompass vintage penny slot machines.

[JC]

The law DOES encompass vintage penny slot machines - that's the problem! Just in case anyone is still unclear:

It is not illegal to own a gaming machine.
It is not illegal to buy a gaming machine.
It is not illegal to play a gaming machine.
It is not illegal to operate a gaming machine, although depending on price of play and payouts, licences and permits will be required.
It is, however, illegal to sell a gaming machine without a section 27 licence, which costs about five grand.
Permits can be obtained at a cost of £25. The permit will cover only one machine, and the permit must cite full details of the person to whom the machine is being sold.
As I've stated previously, a gaming machine is defined as: 'a machine intended for gambling' and takes no account of age; what coin it operates on; payouts etc., and could be a modern club machine with a £1000 jackpot or an allwin with a coin return.

[arrgee]

There has been quite a lot of emphasis on the issue of pre-decimal coinage machines, but as we know, many of these can be converted to accept modern currency and therefore still be used for their intended purpose, so how is a reasoned and logical argument to be constructed to counter this? It's rather like saying I have removed the firing pin so the gun will not fire (at the moment). Rather extreme analogy but the principal is the same.

Do the legislators allow sales of machines to be legal if the machine will only operate on pre-decimal coinage at the time of sale? I think the way forward will be fraught with problems, but totally agree that a way forward to clear this somewhat ridiculous situation needs to be formulated.

[badpenny]

All this business about pre and post-decimal coinage is a red herring. It doesn't matter what coinage the machine accepts, it is still classed as a gaming machine. A machine doesn't even have to accept coins of the realm at all, it can work on tokens, and anything can be classed as a token. An old penny would be classed as a token, for the purposes of the Act.

I agree Exactly! Isn't that how casinos work? You play roulette you place chips which are tokens.

I suspect the Gaming Board would have no interest in negotiating the principle of the Act.
Correct ....They won't renegotiate because it is not their act, I have spoken with them over the years they are not prepared to get into discussion on interpretation, they see their role as enforcing the act not what it means or whether it is affective or fit for purpose. All acts are passed by government, how many votes would this win your MP? It would not be in their interests would it? It's working very well for them as it is. Likewise, it is not in their interest to give impartial advice either. Their only interest is to collect as much revenue as possible, and they are not likely to negotiate that away. But I also suspect that they know that they are on a sticky wicket when it comes to obsolete machines, and that is why they have never (to my knowledge) brought a case to court or prosecuted any collector under the 1968 Act. They've had 40 years to do so.
Haven't they? You may be right I however recall a dealer in the North East who had an export licence, bought machines here and exported them to USA, he operated out of a shop, probably sold antiques as well. They caught him selling machines in England, he got done, lost his export licence and closed his shop, no idea where he is now. Then again I'm relying on my hazy memory and what I was told at the time.

The only way to sort this out is to defy them, and let them bring a test case, if they dare. We have a number of good defences under the Act, which is subject to interpretation. My instinct is that they would not bring a test case for fear of losing it, and if they did it would be laughed out of court.

As far as I know, they have never prosecuted any large retailer for selling toy bandits either, and these are now widespread in the UK with toy pushers and cranes also being widely sold, even in shops such as Superdrug. These operate on plastic tokens, but still come under the Act. So why haven't they prosecuted any of the large retailers?
They don't have to, nothing makes a retailer withdraw something from the shelves quicker than a call from the same department that can conduct a VAT investigation at the drop of a hat. I'd bet money if you complained to the Gaming Board that Superdrug in your High Street were selling toy pushers, they wouldn't be by the end of the week.
Because they know they would be laughed out of court and that would be the end of their powers. My guess is that the Gaming Board realise this, so they've given up on these. They would end up with egg on their faces if they tried to bring a case to court.
You wouldn't be dealing with The GAMING BOARD, it would be The Crown Prosecution Service, they have your machine in one hand as evvodence and the act in the other hand JOB DONE!

I think we have to take the same action if we want to settle the matter once and for all.

When you say WE exactly who do you mean? YOU?
I refer back to Laurence's excellent comment yesterday that if it can go wrong ... it will! So who is going to risk their collection?

[badpenny]

I suspect we are all guilty here of brushing over what's being said in replies already posted. So sorry for being repetitive I probably hid the following too well in my reply to "Anonymous " just now.

In order to understand the options you must first fully understand the problem. We're all loading up to argue with The Gambling Commission, and to challenge their rules. This, I promise you will get nobody anywhere.
I've had dealings with these people on and off over the last ten years.
Firstly: -
They won't renegotiate because it is not their act, I have spoken with them over the years they are not prepared to get into discussion on interpretation, they see their role as enforcing the act not what it means or whether it is affective or fit for purpose. All acts are passed by government, how many votes would this win your MP?

Secondly: -
You're assuming they have never prosecuted a collector for dealing, ARE YOU SURE? I recall a dealer in the North East who had an export licence, bought machines here and exported them to USA, he operated out of a shop, probably sold antiques as well. They caught him selling machines in England, he got done, lost his export licence and they closed his shop, no idea where he is now. Then again I'm relying on my hazy memory and what I was told at the time.

Thirdly : -
They wouldn't stand up to taking us to court as they don't bother summoning the shops in the High Street who sell toy gaming machines ......They don't have to, nothing makes a retailer withdraw something from the shelves quicker than a call from the same department that can conduct a VAT investigation at the drop of a hat. I'd bet money if you complained to the Gaming Board that Superdrug in your High Street were selling toy pushers, they wouldn't be by the end of the week.

And because of the points above it's worth remembering that you wouldn't be dealing with a bureaucratic governmental department that is concerned about being left looking silly. You'd be dealing with The Crown Prosecution Service, who would have your machine and evidence you were selling it in one hand and an Act of Parliament in the other which says you shouldn't have. Be it right, wrong, stupid, not fit for purpose would matter not a jot!
The only way to get an act of parliament changed IMO is through your MP who I am sure has nothing better to do than fight the concerns of what are probably no more than .0005% of his electorate.

It's not the remit of The Gambling Board to change the act nor do they go out looking for anyone breaking it by selling a varnished wooden box containing a ball bearing, but, just like eBay if someone draws it to their attention they have to act and will do so by involving the authorities.

[john t peterson]

Friends,

I find this discussion fascinating. As a guest from another country, I hesitate to jump into the fray given the differences both legal and cultural between our countries. Despite these misgivings, please allow me to weigh in with a few observations. First, your situation is somewhat different from here in the United States in that gambling in the US is regulated at a state level. For that reason, some states permit possession of slot machines and some do not. Those states that do generally require that the machines in question meet some requirement, such as being more than 25 years old. This is a somewhat transparent requirement allowing the State of say, "We still control gambling but we will permit an exception for what clearly is a non-gambling interest." In addition, these states have laws that prohibit the use of any privately held slot machines for commercial use. Could these old slot games still be used illegally? Of course. None the less, the argument used is that the few who would abuse the law should not be able to control the slot machine ownership for the many who would respect the law.

In the UK, your laws are national and you do not have the luxury of pursuing a change of law at a more regional level. Even so, I think the approach to the issue should be the same. The solution, in my opinion, is political. You have to organize enough public support for legal protection of the collecting of these old games such that the Parliament (or whomever would be changing the law) is forced to address the issue. Once you can get a forum, I think the argument can be forcefully made (as has been demonstrated in the pages above) that this is a legitimate issue of preservation of British history and not an issue of gambling.

The question then becomes, how to force the issue politically? Here, technology is your friend. It is very easy to put up a web site with the purpose of signing people up on an electronic petition to advance your cause. You could have a You-Tube video of several games and a spoof of the ridiculous nature of the law; whatever is effective. The point is that people will sign up for a cause if you pique their interest with some apparent inequality and make their participation as simple as signing their name electronically. You could even have an electronic "letter" sent to the appropriate legislator by the individual. As we say in the States, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease!"

That's my two cents; I mean, 2D.

Kind regards,

John Peterson, USA

[badpenny]

Hmmmmm! ...... lots of assurance that the authorities wouldn't pounce!

Oodles of confidence that miracously Crown Prosecution would tear up the act and refuse to do their job.

Gallons of confidence that living in a democracy means we only have to disagree with something in order to make it go away, and in the meantime all will be Hunky Dory.

And the origin of all this "It'll be alright on the night" advice?
Person or persons who prefer to stay anonymous or appear to be a guest.

That fills me with confidence, I'll place my advert now....... I don't think!