SUN BET

[mick]

If you haven't seen it: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/ ... are_btn_tw

Please repost on other forums you use.

JJ

Have already done so well said you and they.

[dagtwo]

Re:Black Type - 'This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they appear to be. Show blocked content'.

[Jimmy Justice]

Have you followed it up with them? Be interested to know what they say.

[dagtwo]

Their reply - 'Thanks for flagging that for us, we will get onto our tech team right away about this.'

[mick]

I get fed up with the OTT verification needs which many of these new books use ,especially when we dare attempt to withdraw winnings. Yesturday i e mailed blacktype inquiring about theirs and received a prompt response................If your card is registered to the address that you live at, and you are on the electoral role at the same address than you should not receive any problems at all depositing or withdrawing funds. 

If this proves correct then well done them (although i note should not rather than will not) but if they can work this way then why do others demand copy's of passports driving licence and proof of length of Penis.!

[spliffhead]

I've been betting with Blacktype for a week or so now, all seems good, they are doing exactly what they say they are doing, I have placed over 100 bets with them in this time.
Tested a withdrawal after I managed to get a few wins in there the first day they listed on Oddschecker, payment was received in 48 hours. They were quite bold with their prices that first day but since then they've reigned it in a bit. Still top prices on several horses though and a welcome addition to the bookie ranks, other bookies should be forced to copy what blacktype are doing in laying to lose a certain amount and not closing accounts.
They only have the basic level of protection and as we know that does appear to be a getout for fraudulent bookmakers to use in order to not pay customers but until the bookmaker proves themselves to be dodgy, people should not knock them whatever you think of their business model and chances of survival.
People have to use commons sense now in dealing with all bookmakers, so never leave big funds in bookmakers, get into a habit of doing more withdrawals, everyday if neccessary. This has to be done as long as the Gambling Commission allow their 'basic protection' nonsense which offers no protection at all for the consumer and provides the bookmaker with an environment for fraud / theft.

I noticed one of our biggest bookmakers only has Basic Protection a few weeks ago, this surprised me as you'd think an organisation as big as Betfred would be forced to have the top level of protection!

[mick]

Cheers spliffhead its good to read some positive customer experience.I shall now be joining you.

[Jimmy Justice]

Ditto - sounds good. Anymore feedback is very welcome.

[Jimmy Justice]

I've been searching online for something I read about punter fund protection. It listed which bookies fitted into which categories. Can you guide me spliffhead as I can't find it again. Thanks in anticipation. Needless to say my request about it to the GC has fallen on deaf ears as yet. There is time, as a response inside 4-6 weeks is unusual.

[spliffhead]

Heres the best I can do for now, there are lots of other smaller bookies which I haven't checked but are more than likely at the Basic level of protection. In truth all should have a high level of protection as that truly protects the consumer and demonstrates a regulator in control of the industry.

I find it incredible that Hills, SJ, Freds and Tote are allowed to trade with a Basic licence

BASIC PROTECTION

William Hill
Stan James
Betfred
Totesport
Sportingbet
Betway
Betbright
Blacktype

MEDIUM PROTECTION

Ladbrokes
Skybet
Boylesports
Betvictor
Paddy Power
888
10bet

HIGH PROTECTION

Betstars
Coral
Betfair