Illegal Cardiff Poker Den Organisers Avoid Immediate Jail 2026

Key Points

• Rassam Noor, 29, and Panayiotis Karayiannis, 30, have been handed three years jail terms suspended for three years.
• Both admitted possession and transfer of criminal property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
• They ran an unregistered poker operation at the second floor of an industrial building at Splott, Cardiff.
• The operation was active between August 2022 and February 2024.
• The venue allowed in-person and online poker under the name of Fish Tank Poker Cardiff and Fish Tank Online.
• In total, the investigation showed that there were about £260,000 of third-party transactions attributed to Rassam and £124,000 attributed to Karayiannis.
• Victims allegedly lost a lot of money, some owing money to the operators of the poker venue.
• Authorities reported that there were no measures to protect vulnerable gamblers or those with gambling addiction from any harm.
• The poker venue was marketed among people associated with serious crimes, including drug dealers and organised crime gangs, as per the investigators.
• There will be another Proceeds of Crime Act hearing on 9 April 2027.

Cardiff Crime (Wales Times) October 08, 2026 – Poker organisers Noor Rassam and Panayiotis Karayiannis were sentenced on after admitting offences involving criminal property connected to an illegal gambling operation that allegedly generated substantial undeclared income and left some players indebted to the organisers.

The two men each received a three-year prison sentence, suspended for three years, at uk/local/cardiff/">Cardiff Crown Court. The sentence followed a multi-agency investigation into an unlicensed poker venue operating from an industrial unit in Splott, Cardiff, between August 2022 and February 2024.

The case was reported by several news organisations, including the BBC, South Wales Argus and gambling-sector publications, following information released by the Gambling Commission and Tarian, the Regional Organised Crime Unit for southern Wales. The Gambling Commission said the investigation began after it received intelligence about an illegal gambling den and passed the information to law-enforcement partners.

What sentence did the Cardiff poker organisers receive?

Rassam and Karayiannis each received three years in prison, suspended for three years. The men pleaded guilty on the first day of their trial to possessing criminal property and transferring criminal property, offences under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

The South Wales Argus reported that Rassam was from Pentwyn, Cardiff, while Karayiannis was from Pontprennau, Cardiff. The BBC also identified both men and reported that they operated the poker games from an upstairs room in an industrial unit in Splott.

A suspended prison sentence means the custodial term does not take effect immediately, provided the offenders comply with the conditions imposed by the court and do not commit further offences during the suspension period. The available reports state the length of the suspended sentences but do not provide a complete list of any additional conditions imposed by the court.

The case is not yet financially concluded. A further Proceeds of Crime Act hearing is scheduled for 9 April 2027. That hearing is expected to address whether money or assets connected with criminal activity should be recovered from the defendants, according to reports by TheLines and other gambling-industry publications.

How did the illegal Cardiff poker operation work?

According to Angharad Thomas of BBC Wales, the operation was based in a specially fitted-out room inside an industrial unit. Investigators found six poker tables, a large spinning prize wheel, seating areas and fridges containing drinks and snacks.

The venue was accessed through a fire exit and monitored by CCTV cameras controlled by the two men. An office contained poker chips, tokens and financial records showing money paid and owed. Investigators also found a cashier’s window protected by Perspex, with a small opening through which financial transactions were handled.

The poker games were promoted both in person and online. The BBC reported that the online games were hosted through a subscription-based poker application under the account name “Fish Tank Online”. The in-person operation was initially advertised as “Ding Ding Poker” and was later rebranded as “Fish Tank Poker Cardiff”.

Evidence gathered during the investigation included WhatsApp messages used to promote events. The South Wales Argus reported that officers seized cash, documents, digital devices and high-value items when warrants were executed in February 2024.

The organisers reportedly did not make their money by directly playing against customers. Instead, they took a commission from each poker hand, a charge commonly known in poker as “the rake”. This arrangement enabled the operators to earn revenue from the games regardless of which players won individual hands.

How much money passed through the operation?

Financial investigators identified approximately £384,000 in third-party payments linked to the two men during the period in which the venue was operating.

The BBC reported that about £260,000 in third-party payments was received by Rassam. Karayiannis received approximately £124,000. Both accounts reportedly contained numerous transactions referring to “poker”.

The combined figure does not necessarily represent the total profit made by the operation. It refers to payments identified by investigators as passing through accounts connected to the men. The reports also state that the men generated income by taking a commission from poker hands.

Detective Constable Charles Lan of Tarian ROCU said the business generated “substantial profits” that were not declared for tax purposes. As reported by the South Wales Argus, Lan said the operation provided the men with significant personal benefits, including foreign holidays and other high-value spending.

The available reports do not provide a final calculation of the venue’s total turnover, its net profit or the precise amount allegedly retained by each defendant after expenses.

Were players harmed by the illegal gambling den?

Authorities said players lost significant amounts of money through the games and that some became indebted to the organisers.

The BBC quoted DC Lan as saying individuals had lost “significant sums of money” and that some had become indebted to those running the operation. The South Wales Argus published similar comments, saying the harm caused by the operation should not be underestimated.

The authorities’ concern extended beyond the fact that the venue was unlicensed. Investigators said the organisers had not put in place the protections required of legitimate gambling operators.

DC Lan said there were no safeguards to identify or support vulnerable people and no measures to protect individuals experiencing gambling addiction. Such safeguards can include age verification, monitoring of gambling behaviour, procedures for identifying risk and routes to support for people experiencing harm.

The reports do not state how many players attended the venue, how many people became indebted or the total amount lost by customers. They also do not identify individual players.

Was the poker operation linked to organised crime?

Tarian ROCU said the organisers promoted the games to people involved in serious criminality, including drug dealers and organised crime groups.

The South Wales Argus reported that investigators found evidence that the men actively promoted their poker games to people involved in serious crime. Police also said the defendants had boasted about the presence of drug dealers and members of organised crime groups at their events.

According to the police account, the venue provided a location where such individuals could participate in gambling and where further criminal activity could be facilitated or funded. These statements were made by investigators and form part of the authorities’ explanation of the wider significance of the case.

The men were sentenced for possessing and transferring criminal property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The reports do not state that Rassam or Karayiannis were convicted of drug trafficking, membership of an organised crime group or specific offences committed by people who attended the poker games.

That distinction is important. The available court reporting establishes the offences to which the two men pleaded guilty, while the wider allegations about the venue’s clientele and its alleged role in facilitating criminal activity come from investigators.

How was the illegal poker venue discovered?

The Gambling Commission said the case began after it received information about an illegal gambling den. That information was passed to Tarian ROCU, which led the investigation with support from other agencies.

In February 2024, officers executed warrants at the industrial unit and at other addresses connected with the two men. The investigation involved Tarian ROCU, the Gambling Commission, HM Revenue and Customs and Cardiff Council’s Licensing Department, according to the South Wales Argus.

Officers arrested both men and seized cash, documents, digital devices and high-value items. Investigators then examined financial records, communications and material found at the venue.

The physical layout of the premises, including the poker tables, cashier’s window, CCTV system and financial records, helped investigators establish how the business operated. WhatsApp messages and the subscription-based poker application provided evidence of the promotion of both in-person and online games.

What did the Gambling Commission say?

Sue Young, the Gambling Commission’s executive director of operations, said the regulator would continue to work with law-enforcement partners against illegal gambling operations in Great Britain.

As quoted by the BBC, Young said the message was clear: people who run illegal casinos could receive a tip-off, be caught and face significant consequences. The South Wales Argus published the same central warning in its account of the case.

The Gambling Commission’s involvement reflects its role in receiving intelligence about suspected illegal gambling and working with other agencies. The sentencing also demonstrates that an unlicensed operation may result in consequences under criminal law, including offences involving criminal property and proceeds of crime.

The regulator’s statement did not suggest that every illegal gambling case would result in the same sentence. The outcome in Cardiff was based on the facts established in that case, the offences admitted and the court’s sentencing decision.

What happens at the next hearing?

The next major stage is the Proceeds of Crime Act hearing listed for 9 April 2027.

The purpose of such proceedings is to consider whether defendants benefited financially from criminal conduct and whether money or assets should be recovered. Reports by TheLines and other gambling-industry outlets said the hearing would address the recovery of assets or funds obtained through criminal activity.

The available reporting does not state what specific assets may be considered or whether any confiscation order has already been made. The April hearing will therefore be important in determining the financial consequences of the operation beyond the suspended prison sentences.

Background: why are unlicensed gambling operations significant?

Licensed gambling operators in Great Britain are subject to regulatory requirements designed to reduce harm and support the integrity of gambling. These requirements can include controls relating to customer protection, financial transactions, age restrictions, safer-gambling procedures and cooperation with regulators.

An unlicensed poker operation does not operate within that regulatory framework. In the Cardiff case, investigators said the venue had no safeguards to identify vulnerable customers or assist people experiencing gambling addiction.

The case also involved the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 because investigators identified criminal property connected with the operation. The men admitted possessing and transferring criminal property rather than facing a conviction solely for operating an unlicensed gambling venue.

The case shows how a gambling investigation can develop into a wider financial-crime investigation. Evidence about payments, assets, communications and the movement of money can become central to the prosecution and to later confiscation proceedings.

The Cardiff operation also illustrates the difference between a licensed poker venue and an illegal gambling den. Licensed businesses must comply with applicable gambling laws and regulatory controls, while an illegal operation may avoid those obligations and expose customers to financial and personal risks.

Prediction: how could this affect poker players and gambling audiences?

For poker players in Cardiff and across Great Britain, the development is likely to increase attention on whether venues and online platforms are properly licensed. Players may face greater scrutiny when joining private games promoted through messaging applications, social-media groups or unfamiliar poker platforms.

Regulators and police may also use the case to encourage members of the public to report suspected illegal gambling operations. A venue operating from an industrial unit, using cash transactions or offering games without visible licensing information may attract attention from enforcement agencies, although those features alone do not prove criminal conduct.

The case may make players more cautious about games where there are no clear rules for handling disputes, no responsible-gambling protections and no transparent record of deposits or withdrawals. It may also highlight the financial danger of borrowing money to continue gambling, particularly where organisers control both the games and outstanding debts.

For licensed gambling businesses, the case reinforces the importance of demonstrating compliance and maintaining safeguards for vulnerable customers. For illegal operators, the suspended sentences and the scheduled confiscation hearing show that enforcement consequences may extend beyond the venue’s closure to criminal convictions and possible recovery of assets.

The longer-term effect will depend on further enforcement activity and the outcome of the April 2027 Proceeds of Crime Act hearing. The case itself does not establish that all private poker games are illegal, but it does show the legal and financial risks associated with operating gambling games without the required authorisation.