MBS, RWS fined for breaching social safeguard requirements
-
SINGAPORE : The Casino Regulatory Authority of Singapore (CRA) has fined Singapore's two casino operators for breaching social safeguard requirements - when they let in people without valid entry levies, persons on exclusion orders and minors (persons under the age of 21).
Marina Bay Sands (MBS) was fined S$255,000, while Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) was imposed financial penalties of S$130,000.
The casino regulator said the financial penalties were imposed on the casino operators for breaching regulations under the Casino Control Act during the period 28 October 2010 to 30 April 2011, and 15 August 2010 to 30 April 2011 respectively.
MBS had let in 14 persons without valid entry levies, while RWS let in five.
MBS had also allowed two persons with expired entry levies to remain in the casino, while RWS did so with three persons.
Separately, MBS let in six persons on exclusion orders, and RWS let in one.
MBS was also censured for letting in two minors.
RWS was fined for letting in six minors and was also separately censured for five cases of similar breaches.
Chief executive of the CRA, Lau Peet Meng, said the operators need to improve their entry systems and processes, exercise more diligence in carrying out their checks, and comply fully with the laws and regulations.
He said: "These social safeguards are put in place to mitigate the casino's potential impact on vulnerable persons and to ring fence the casinos from potential criminal influence. Hence, we are taking tough disciplinary action against the casino operators for the cases where they have failed to show due care in complying with our requirements to prevent minors and excluded persons from entering the casinos, and to ensure that entry levies are duly paid.
"The operators will need to improve their entry systems and processes, exercise more diligence in carrying out their checks, and comply fully with our laws and regulations. CRA will not hesitate to take firm action against the operators should such incidents recur."
- CNA/ms -
Seriously lol WTF!!!... they can afford to pay the fines every MONTH and continue to flaunt the laws...
-
what is $155 000 and $255 000 fine to the rich casinos?
-
It makes them look ridiculous,they got fined and will take back the money with added interest.It is like I take out money from my pocket and put it back.The fines seem to be loose change to them.
-
The CRA seems to be partner owner of the casino. But how to tranfser the funds? By setting up this 'fine, fine' thingy.
-
By having "social safeguards", are they are implying that the casino is not socially desirable?
-
Originally posted by charlize:
By having "social safeguards", are they are implying that the casino is not socially desirable?
it's socially desirable to the MIW because it brings an increase in GDP, allowing them to give themselves bigger bonuses and therefore their "social standing" increases..
-
Money money money.
It's a rich man's world.