Not wrong but it's risky on the side of the casino owner. What if the gambler won't pay and won't come back again on the casino? Gambling plus loaning is something that won't fit. It's a bad idea. For loans, there is already a separate company for that. They have special conditions to make sure that they won't lose big in the long run.
The cheap internet, gadgets which has the ability to connect to the internet and covid has made people more exposed online or to online casinos. No wonder why they are growing and seems to surpass the land-based casinos. When a gambler found out that a casino offer loans, the more they will play on there. It's the casino is the one who will experience a fear.
It's not good business for casinos if they provide loans to gamblers who often lose or don't have the money to gamble. And if those gamblers didn't have any collateral the casinos could hold, the casinos wouldn't be able to get their money back because those people would run away after gambling and not come back for a while. The casino business cannot grow and can suffer losses in the long term. And we can say that this was due to the betting agent's mistake because the betting agent dared to provide loans to gamblers without checking the background of the gamblers and without collateral.