Teenager sues bet365 ?

Share and discuss successes you've had. What or who has helped you to win a dispute? What else could we provide to help others successfully complain? It is time to hit-back and obtain the rights that all other consumers have.
Post Reply
User avatar
cosmicway
Supporter
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:18 pm

Teenager sues bet365 ?

Post by cosmicway » Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:14 am

Copied this from some place.
They don't provide original link or say when it happened.
Exclusive: Teenager takes bet365 to court over £1m 'won' on horse races

A student is suing one of Britain’s biggest bookmakers for refusing to pay out £1 million on a winning bet on the horses.

In a battle of David vs Goliath proportions, Megan McCann, who was just 19 when she placed the bet, has lodged a writ in the High Court in Northern Ireland against Hillside (UK Sports) LP, the company which operates bet365, an online betting company run by the UK’s wealthiest businesswoman.

Miss McCann, who lives near Belfast, claims that she is owed £1,009,960 by bet365, which was co-founded and run by Denise Coates, who is said to be worth £3.2 billion.

Miss McCann staked almost £25,000 on 12 different horses in four relatively obscure races, winning £985,000 from the betting giant. But the betting company, whose chief executive is Ms Coates, has declined to honour the wager.

It has insisted that Miss McCann is in “flagrant breach” of its own terms and conditions because the firm is convinced the original betting stake was supplied by a ‘third party’. In legal letters from bet365’s lawyers, Miss McCann found herself accused of fraud and cheating.

Miss McCann is understood to vehemently deny any wrongdoing. The successful wager involved a total of 960 £13 each way ‘Lucky 15’ bets placed on 12 horses running in the 6.10 at Bath, the 7.20 at Kempton, and the 7.00 and 8.30 at Naas in Ireland on June 22 last year.

‘Lucky 15’ bets allow a combination of accumulated winnings. But rather than pay up, bet365 has withheld the sum as well as Miss McCann’s initial stake of £24,960.

Exasperated at bet365’s refusal to pay up, she called in lawyers who issued a write in May in the High Court in Belfast.

The writ, seen by the Telegraph, accuses Bet 365 and its Gibraltar-based parent company of breach of contract and demands damages of £1,009,960.

A day after her ‘win’, Miss McCann contacted bet365 to withdraw her money. From documents seen by this newspaper, it is understood that a bet365 representative, via the website’s ‘live chat’ service, congratulated the customer and confirmed the request.

The following day, she received a telephone call from another staff member who asked a number of questions.

These bizarrely included: “What is your star sign?” After answering all queries with regards to the bet and her identity apparently satisfactorily confirmed by the agent, Miss McCann was advised that the money would be processed within 48 hours. The money never materialised. Instead Miss McCann’s account was suspended, and then closed.

Even the £24,960 stake has not been returned. At the heart of bet365’s refusal to pay is the betting firm’s insistence that Miss McCann breached a ‘no third party’ rule, which insists the whole stake must be put up by the customer alone.

Miss McCann’s lawyers dispute that she agreed to such a rule, which are buried within terms and conditions which are “too lengthy, too complex and much too vague for the average customer to understand.”

Such a rule might also effectively prevent syndicates from betting.

Her lawyers contend that the wording of such a ‘no third party rule’ clause effectively means that “the husband who puts a bet on the winner of X-factor for his wife, or on the winner of the Grand National, would have those winnings ‘robbed’ of him.”

The case brought by Miss McCann could have profound implications for all customers betting online. Misss McCann’s lawyers, in their correspondence to bet365, allege that its terms and conditions amount to “nothing more than a ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ wish list”.

In one legal letter, seen by The Telegraph, her lawyers wrote: “Our client’s case is very straightforward. She placed a bet with your client. She won. She is entitled to her winnings.”

In one response, bet365’s lawyers replied: “You claim that this dispute is simply about your client placing a bet; and being entitled to winnings.

"This is wrong. it is a case in which your client has been operating the account... using the funds of and for the benefit of third parties, in flagrant breach of our client’s terms.”

The letter goes on: “Our client has reasonable grounds to suspect your client to be guilty of criminal offences including fraud by false representation; cheating or attempted cheating.”

The case has echoes of a previous dispute involving Barney Curley, an Irish gambler and racehorse trainer. In May 2010, accumulator bets on four horses running on the same day – three trained by Curley – netted a total of £3.9m.

On that occasion, another online betting company refused – initially - to pay out £823,000 of the total winnings to Curley’s relatives.

After legal action was instigated, that company eventually paid out in full. Miss McCann has hired the same lawyer Andrew Montague, who represented Curley, to fight her case.

Mr Montague said: “This is something of a ‘déjà vu’ scenario for me, but as the case is now before the Belfast High Court, I am not in a position to comment further.”

A spokesman for bet365 said: “A full investigation has been carried out into the circumstances of the bet that was placed.

"Bet365 is entirely satisfied the circumstances are such that winnings are not payable in relation to it.

"We expect this position to be upheld at trial. We are not prepared to comment further whilst litigation is ongoing.”

Bet365 was launched in 2000 and has turned into one of Britain’s most profitable companies, based in Stoke but registered offshore in Gibraltar.

Ms Coates, 49, a mother-of-five launched the business with her brother John Coates. The company is now worth an estimated £4.5 billion and Ms Coates owns just over half. Forbes estimates her wealth at £3.2 billion.

The most recent company accounts show that she took home £117.5 million, making her Britain’s highest paid businesswoman.

Her basic pay of £54 million was topped up by a £63.5 million dividend. Ms Coates' father Peter is the chairman of Stoke City Football Club.

Bet365’s name has become familiar to sports fans during TV ad breaks at half-time of Sky’s Premier League games as actor Ray Winstone’s gravelly tones seductively remind them to make bets while matches are still being played.

The alleged refusal of online betting companies to honour wagers is now subjected to a joint investigation by the [CENSORED] Commission and the Competition and Markets Authority.

Sarah Harrison, [CENSORED] Commission’s chief executive, has said: “ [CENSORED] operators must treat customers fairly – but some have been relying on terms that are unclear with too many strings attached.”
How on earth did the company know the money deposited was n't hers ?
And if they actually did why accept it in the first place as a deposit ?

Many years ago I deposited some money to a betfair account from someone else's paypal. The reason was I din n't have any money in the bank and paypal had not come to Greece - but my friend had a U.S. paypal account. It was duly accepted of course and I used it.

Sounds ludicrous.

Jimmy Justice
Site Admin
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:16 am

Re: Teenager sues bet365 ?

Post by Jimmy Justice » Mon Jul 10, 2017 8:34 am

This is the link to the original article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07 ... rse-races/

Much, much more to come on these topics over the coming weeks.

JJ

User avatar
cosmicway
Supporter
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:18 pm

Re: Teenager sues bet365 ?

Post by cosmicway » Mon Jul 10, 2017 9:28 am


Jimmy Justice
Site Admin
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:16 am

Re: Teenager sues bet365 ?

Post by Jimmy Justice » Wed Jul 12, 2017 9:50 am

Typical Racing Post coverage. No analysis of why this happens or actually what has happened. I recognise they are constraints due to the legal action, but the RP have become so reliant on bookmaker income they rarely analyse anything they do properly.

Sad really.

JJ

User avatar
cosmicway
Supporter
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:18 pm

Re: Teenager sues bet365 ?

Post by cosmicway » Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:37 am

There was the other one with the Rangers relegation too.
It's one of many disputes, including the cheesepie !

Suppose you are in a race course and the stewards have a magical mechanism that works out cheats instantly and also who are the ones who reaped rewards from the cheat.
They say "halt payments".
How does that affect you ?
One possibility is the final verdict of the stewards is "we change the order of finish from 3-4 to 5-6" and you have the 5-6. The cheats lose and you say "great, fantastic, justice prevailed".
Another is they say "race is void - all stakes returned". You are less joyous, but happy again.
Another is they say "race is void - punters money goes towards a jackpot". You are significantly less joyous, but ok.
And the last possibility is they make the race 5-6, but you have n't got a 5-6 ticket or maybe you did n't even have a bet on the race.

It looks to me that in the last case you won't like it at all.
You will say "hey, what if tomorrow I find some secret info, by hook or by crook or even by intuition - has happened before, can happen again and they won't be paying me". So you are mad at the authority who declined payment to the original first past the post winners.

Which one from the above applies now ?
I don't know but I just think that if there is to be any justice I might as well forget them all.
The real issue here is "have you proof that there has been cheating ?".
You gotta have proof.
National justice operates on the principle that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
Human societies believe it is to their advantage to go by this rule and it applies to even crimes of extreme violence.
Why is it different here, when we trust our money to a bookmaker company to handle them ?

I won money out of what appeared to be a fixed match once. Some 2000 euros.
It's donkey's years now so I might as well name the teams.
It was Athinaikos the small Greek team who bothered United inside the Old Trafford once upon a time against the team of Ioannina. I 'm sure as hell they made it a gift to Ioannina to avoid relegation. But what did I know ? I 'm in the other side of the town, decided to have a bet at 10.30 Saturday night, managed to squeeze it through at 11 o' clock - just before the shops closed.
So what might have happened here ?
If it was found out I stand to get nothing. But all I did is I simply guessed those two were going to fix it !

Jimmy Justice
Site Admin
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:16 am

Re: Teenager sues bet365 ?

Post by Jimmy Justice » Sat Jul 15, 2017 9:17 am

At present gambling companies do not have to provide proof when corresponding with the customer, only claims, and in effect it is exactly the same with arbitrators as the customer does not get to see what the company provides as 'evidence', so you are RIGHT; it's all wrong and it's why companies do not like people going down a legal small claims route where the correct balance of power applies.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest