London's Underground Poker Clubs

Big Bluff was not especially secret.

The private members' club on Green Lanes in Palmers Green advertised on social media and attracted substantial poker tournaments. Contemporary reporting put some prize pools as high as £150,000. The club also held a Club Gaming Permit.

Big Bluff had obtained its permit as a non-commercial members' club. Its application described darts, pool, backgammon, board games and card games among its activities. It was also said to be a fishing club. Prosecutors found something rather different. Poker was the main activity and owner Ahmet Melin was taking money from the business for his own benefit.

Melin was convicted at Wood Green Crown Court in April 2014 of five money-laundering offences arising from the operation of the club. He received a 15-month prison sentence. A later confiscation hearing found that he had made more than £400,000 from the illegal poker operation.

Those money-laundering convictions did not depend on proving that customers were bringing criminal money into Big Bluff. The prosecution treated profits from the unlawful poker business as criminal property under the Proceeds of Crime Act. Melin's use of that money formed the basis of the offences.

The club had tables, players and a permit. Its permit did not allow Melin to run the premises mainly for gambling or operate the club for his personal financial gain. Gambling Commission guidance still points to the case when warning licensing authorities about misuse of Club Gaming Permits.

Poker outside a casino

Poker does not have to be played in a licensed casino.

Private gaming can take place without a gambling licence where the conditions in the Gambling Act are met. The public cannot have access, nobody can charge for taking part and nothing can be deducted from stakes or prizes. The organiser cannot make a profit from providing the gaming.

Members' clubs have another option. A genuine members' club can apply to its local licensing authority for a Club Gaming Permit. The permit allows equal-chance gaming including poker. There is currently no general limit on poker stakes or prizes under such a permit, although participation fees are limited to £3 per person per day.

A members' club cannot be created as a commercial enterprise. It must be run for the benefit of its members and cannot be created or mainly used for gambling.

Poker can also be provided under the separate rules for exempt gaming in members' and commercial clubs. Those games face tighter restrictions. Stakes and prizes are limited and operators cannot take a levy from the money staked or won.

The Commission's guidance to councils reflects the history of clubs using membership arrangements to run poker businesses. A club with a permit can still face enforcement if poker becomes its main activity or the operation is being used for somebody's financial gain.

London poker clubs in court

Big Bluff was not London's first substantial poker club to end up in court.

The Gutshot Poker Club in Clerkenwell had more than 12,000 players when chairman Derek Kelly was convicted in January 2007. Players paid an entrance fee and the club also took a levy from winnings. Kelly argued that Texas Hold'em was a game of skill. Prosecutors relied on the chance introduced by the shuffled cards and he was convicted under the Gaming Act 1968.

Gutshot belongs to the legal regime that preceded the full implementation of the Gambling Act 2005 later that year. By the time of Kelly's conviction, it was an established central London club with thousands of players rather than a small private game.

Another prosecution followed in Kingston under the current regime. Nicholas Clark and Luke Flack pleaded guilty after unlawful poker tournaments were run at a London private members' club from November 2013 until December 2014. In 2016 they were ordered to pay more than £32,000 in fines and legal costs. The Gambling Commission supported Kingston Council during the investigation.

AML checks in licensed casinos

Casinos sit within the regulated sector under the Money Laundering Regulations. The Gambling Commission is their supervisory authority and its 2026 assessment continues to rate non-remote casinos as high risk for money laundering.

Casino operators have customer due diligence, risk assessment, monitoring and record-keeping obligations. Higher-risk circumstances can require enhanced due diligence. Checks can extend beyond confirming somebody's identity to understanding transactions and, where appropriate, the origin of the money being used.

For the customer, this can mean being asked about occupation, financial circumstances or the source of particular funds. Further information or documents may be requested as the relationship develops.

Some customers will provide what is requested. Others may decide that they do not want to disclose further financial information and stop playing with that operator.

A commercial poker room operating outside the regulated sector may ask far fewer questions. It may also keep fewer formal customer records.

GamRight found no reliable evidence showing how many players use underground poker in London to avoid AML checks. Reluctance to hand financial information to a casino does not establish that somebody has criminal funds. Privacy is also a legitimate concern for some customers.

The Gambling Commission's 2026 assessment says illegal gambling can generate proceeds of crime and can also be used to launder money generated elsewhere. The National Risk Assessment cited by the Commission identified an increase in illegal casinos targeting the UK.

The licensed casino sector is itself regarded as vulnerable to money laundering. The Commission currently rates both remote and non-remote casinos as high risk within its gambling-sector assessment. The wider UK National Risk Assessment rates the casino sector as medium risk when comparing it with other regulated sectors.

Regulation around the game

Cards, chips and a dealer tell a player very little about the business running the game.

A licensed casino has an identifiable operator accountable to the Gambling Commission. Casino operators have obligations under the Gambling Act, the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice, the Proceeds of Crime Act and, specifically for casinos, the Money Laundering Regulations.

Those obligations create records and responsibilities around the gambling. The regulator can investigate the operator and take action against its licence.

Players can still have disputes with licensed casinos and licensed status does not prevent misconduct. There is, however, a regulated business responsible for the premises and the gambling taking place there.

An illegal commercial poker room sits outside that system. There may be no comparable record of who brought money into the premises, who approved transactions or how a disputed game or payment was handled.

Recent raids on physical gambling premises

Illegal gambling enforcement in Britain is not confined to websites.

In May 2026, Greater Manchester Police, the Gambling Commission and Manchester City Council raided suspected illegal gambling premises in Manchester city centre. Officers reported finding gambling tables, chips, records, account books, cash and mobile phones. Two people were arrested on suspicion of Gambling Act and Licensing Act offences.

Two premises in Doncaster were raided in July. Officers found poker tables, slot machines and account books and seized just under £9,000. Eight people were arrested, although seven of those arrests related to immigration matters rather than suspected gambling offences.

Another Manchester operation took place on 21 September 2026. Police raided four city-centre properties with support from the Gambling Commission and Manchester City Council. Gambling tables, records and account books were seized along with more than £20,000 in cash. Four people were arrested. One man was arrested on suspicion of money laundering and breaching the Gambling Act. The investigation was announced by the Commission on 23 September.

The arrests remain allegations unless offences are subsequently admitted or proved. None of these operations was in London.

Underground poker in London today

Gutshot, Big Bluff and the Kingston prosecution document London poker operations that fell outside the rules applying to them over more than a decade.

GamRight found no authoritative estimate of the number of underground poker rooms or unlicensed casino-style venues operating in London in 2026. There is no reliable public list of active premises.

Published enforcement material gives little sense of the size of any current London market. It does not tell us how many games are running, what stakes are being played, how customers find them or how money is handled inside them.

Without direct evidence from current cases or people involved in those games, putting a number on the market would be guesswork.

About this investigation

GamRight reviewed Gambling Commission material covering private gaming, members' clubs, Club Gaming Permits, poker and casino anti-money-laundering requirements. We also reviewed enforcement material and contemporary reporting on the London cases discussed above.

"Underground poker club" is a descriptive term rather than a category created by the Gambling Act 2005. Private poker is not automatically illegal and poker can lawfully be provided in some clubs without a casino licence.

Historical venues described as illegal in this article are supported by convictions, guilty pleas or official enforcement material. Recent arrests are described as investigations rather than findings of guilt.