World

House Of Lord Warns: Loot Boxes Is Gambling

Published

5 years ago

July 9, 2020

It is official now: loot boxes are considered as a form of gambling. Following a period of concern and extensive discussion by various groups, The House Of Lords Gambling Committee from the United Kingdom officially declared loot boxes in videos games as a form of gambling, and they have issued stern warnings about the continuing implementation of it in games.

Loot boxes, despite not being a casino game, can be related to it. In a betting perspective, loot boxes can be related to gambling in the way that it gives the player or buyer the chance to win an item but without any guarantee. That is how most casino games work, after all.

“It’s gambling”

In a report that was recently released, BBC reported that the House of Lords have declared loot boxes as a form of gambling, as it meets all the factors that are present in all gambling games. To learn more you can read more online casino reviews to get the better idea about the best bookmaker.

“If a product looks like gambling and feels like gambling, it should be regulated as gambling,” the report said. “There is academic research which proves that there is a connection, though not necessarily a causal link, between loot box spending and problem gambling.”

In line with that, the house of Lords is also now seeking to have loot boxes in videos games be regulated in the same way that gambling is being regulated. Otherwise, the game developers and owners will be forced to remove loot boxes from their games–or risk getting in trouble with the law.

What are the requirements for gambling?

To better understand how the House of Lords arrived at their decision of declaring loot boxes as a form of gambling, it is a good idea to better understand what makes an activity a form of gambling first.

By definition, an activity can be considered a form of gambling or betting when it meets three requirements: there is a consideration, there is a risk, and there is a prize.

Consideration refers to any amount wagered by the playing party. Most of the times, it comes in the form of monetary currency. However, wagering is not limited to money itself. It could be other forms of resources such as property, gold, or any other things that can be wagered in a game, as long as the betting party allows it. In loot boxes, players often purchase the loot box with real money in order to get the in-game item.

Risk, on the other hand, refers to the chance involved after placing your bet or wagering your resources. In gambling, there is no assurance that your bet would win. You have the chance to win it, or you could also blow it and lose. In the same way, there is never a guarantee that a player will get any promised major price for a single draw.

Finally, the prize. In gambling, the prize could be a fixed amount you can get if you win such jackpots from a slot machine. The prize could also be the resources of the opposing player which will be awarded to you should you win.

Loot boxes are not gambling–in 2017

In a 2017 report, the UK Gambling Commission declared that loot boxes in video games can’t be considered a form of gambling, through its elements are similar to gambling. According to the regulating body, there is a fine line that separate gambling from something that is not gambling.

One of the reasons why they made the declaration back then was that according to them they found loot boxes to be purely an in-game risk purchase, and items won from it cannot be brought with or traded with real-world money.

World

Criminal probe focussed on Mehtas shipping business

Published

3 weeks ago

August 6, 2025

Jonathan Grilli

From Monitoring Desk

DUBAI: An Asian family linked with the shipping business is facing criminal investigation in several jurisdictions including in Dubai and Far East where the family’s companies are under active investigation now, according to the authorities in three countries.

Sanjay and Gaurav Mehta, through their companies Best Oasis Ltd in Dubai and Priya Blue Industries in Gujarat, are facing investigations over money-laundering suspicions and suspected links to the Russian oil sector, sanctioned by the western countries, sources shared.

Sanjay and Gaurav Mehta, through their companies Best Oasis Ltd in Dubai and Priya Blue Industries in Gujarat have projected an image of environmental responsibility in ship recycling. They have tout certifications, attend global summits, and positioned themselves as ESG-compliant but their business practices have come under intense probe now. Their operations reportedly involve dismantling high-risk ships, using cash transactions, and leveraging political connections to avoid accountability, a source shared looking into the companies’ affairs. The investigation is being conducted in Dubai and the Far East.

The investigators are looking at the Mehtas operations dating back to 2006 when they came to attention of the law enforcement for the first time. Priya Blue dismantled the “Blue Lady” in 2006, a vessel containing over 1,200 tons of asbestos and radioactive waste, despite protests and objections from Greenpeace. Later, the “Exxon Valdez,” notorious for a major oil spill, was renamed “Oriental Nicety” and dismantled by the Mehtas in Gujarat, drawing international attention. In recent years, their transactions have become less conspicuous but reportedly more hazardous.

In 2025, Best Oasis allegedly acquired and dismantled at least four vessels linked to sanctioned entities, including Iranian and Houthi-controlled networks. These weren’t obscure ships; they were designated under U.S. terrorism sanctions for their involvement in oil smuggling and arms transport. According to investigators, here are the details of the sanctioned ships dismantled by Best Oasis in 2025: IMO: 9155808, Name: NOLAN (SOLAN), Sanction: SDN (SDGT), Beaching: 31 Jan 2025, Plot 16; IMO: 9221657, Name: BLUEFINS, Sanction: SDN (SDGT); Beaching: 26 Feb 2025, Plot 16; IMO: 9105085, Name: CONTRACT II, Sanction: SDN risk, Beaching: Arrived mid-2025, Plot 27; IMO: 9209300, Name: GAMA II, Sanction: SDN (SDGT); and Beaching: Pending/Planned, Plot 34

All four vessels were reportedly dismantled in Alang on plots leased by proxy firms connected to the Mehtas. These short-term leases, approved on a ship-by-ship basis by the Gujarat Maritime Board, reportedly make regulatory oversight nearly impossible. Once dismantling is complete, plot registrations often lapse, leaving no long-term record, according to documents shared by the investigators in Dubai.

Rahul Mistry, a shipping compliance researcher, noted this as a growing pattern: “This is a pattern we’ve seen more frequently in the last two years sanctioned hulls arriving under the radar, processed fast, with no digital trace.”

Payments for these vessels reportedly bypassed normal financial channels. According to sources familiar with the deals, transactions were settled in cash, either on-site or through offshore handlers. One source described entire ship values being paid in foreign currency bundles, avoiding Indian and Dubai banking disclosures, said one of the investigators familiar with the matter.

A retired port official Mr. Akin Yadav, familiar with Alang and Gujarat Maritime Board approvals stated that short-term leases are routinely used to avoid scrutiny, adding, “It was never meant to be a permanent workaround. But it’s become one.”

Political connections also reportedly play a role. Union Minister Mansukh Mandaviya and Gujarat State Minister Jitu Vaghani have been linked to approvals granted for Best Oasis and its proxies. While there’s no direct evidence of personal gain, sources allege that both men used their influence to expedite approvals, slow down inquiries, and shield the companies from enforcement.

Despite these activities in India, Best Oasis is expanding under new branding. A recent joint venture in Japan with Hiroshi Abe is being marketed as a clean, regionally responsible recycling partner for Japanese shipowners.

Mariko Fujita, a Tokyo-based maritime consultant, observed, “They’re presenting themselves as a new entity with no reference to past controversies. But none of the underlying ownership or structure has changed.”

In Alang, the situation reportedly remains much the same. Plot numbers are reassigned, cash continues to circulate and the same network of breakers and handlers is reportedly involved. Individuals like Jayant Vanani (also known as Budhabhai Patel) and Ramesh Mendapara are frequently named in connection with specific beachings, including “Contract II” and “GAMA II.” Both have been previously linked to other shadow transactions involving distressed or sanctioned tonnage.

Several yards allegedly connected to Best Oasis, including Shantamani Ship Breakers and Sai Baba Ship Breakers, reportedly operate with minimal inspection, despite numerous reports of irregularities in worker safety, hazardous waste disposal, and compliance with Indian scrapping codes.

This system, according to multiple sources, appears to be intentionally designed to operate in plain sight with just enough paperwork to pass basic scrutiny but not enough to trigger meaningful enforcement. There is no indication that regulatory bodies including customs, port health officers, or environmental oversight panels have conducted full inspections of any of the sanctioned vessels listed. Most were reportedly cleared and dismantled within days of arrival.

Rahul Mistry said: “This isn’t merely a loophole; it’s reportedly a business model. Best Oasis and Priya Blue are allegedly running a high-volume, low-visibility operation that filters sanctioned, end-of-life ships through legal instruments to appear legitimate on paper. This reportedly involves routing untaxed funds and shielded actors through a well-connected political and industrial network. As global scrutiny of ESG practices intensifies, many of these activities are allegedly being whitewashed through new partnerships and branding, but the underlying mechanisms reportedly remain unchanged.”