Australian
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 129 comments are related to the topic:
B E T 365 refusal to pay punter
B E T 365 refusal to pay punter
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 129
|
By:
i understand where spy and cast r comming from, but they have to pay and then start criminal procedings, after all he is innocent until proven guilty, even though we all can see the writing on the wall
|
|
By:
They must be within their legal rights to withhold payment while investigating, as if they weren't, surely said punter would be well within his rights to take the matter to the police.
The outcome will be interesting, as will be what happens about 365 changing the rules and backdating them |
|
By:
What happens if the TAB doesn't pay because they suspect a race is dodgy Mr Spy?
|
|
By:
SPY
How do you assume they are within their legal right to withhold any money. Unitab paid their commitments. NSW and VIC paid their commitments. 365 welshed on their bet. Not very honorable. As we have said for the last 55 posts, if there was any wrong doing by the punter civil action should occur. |
|
By:
Tab don't give a fk, they got their cut
|
|
By:
Mr Truthful as i just answered Mr joel, Tab could care less, they get same take out regardless of how result eventuated.
I assume they're within legal rights, otherwise why haven't charges been laid against them if they aren't? |
|
By:
and if it was a fixed odds TAB race spy?
|
|
By:
Can't answer that Mr Cushion i'm sorry
|
|
By:
how did the bloke who had the bet and owns the 2 favourites stop them so effectively
|
|
By:
r u serious Veronica, dogs r the easiest to nobble, have u not heard of the dog whisperer
|
|
By:
who is going to lay charges against 365.
They have their own rules and can do as they please. You already know they illegally changed their rules and subitted them to the NT gaming commission, and backdated this wich is highly illegal without informing every customer. Banks advise every customer re changes to credit card or banking rules and don't backdate them. I'm waiting on the gaming commission to take action against these pr@cks for their illegal activity, but not holding my breath. At least betting with a fair dinkum bookie on track stewards would resolve it immediately |
|
By:
i think hes still a genius as he got them not to chase so were not nobbled did he get then trifecta as well
|
|
By:
they should arrest the guy and induct him into the hall of fame with jim cruisin cassidy
|
|
By:
crusin was the one he all but jumped off at rosehill for victa
|
|
By:
Think it was Cruising Ms Veronica, but i get your drift
|
|
By:
yes was a beauty so loyal to victa
|
|
By:
jim's defence consisted of betting his daughter ... and telling the stewards how they usually hook one
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1300&dat=19880621&id=ADopAAAAIBAJ&sjid=9JYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4029,481286 |
|
By:
If you say pay out as soon as the result ok is given at the track no matter what, you are giving dopers, scammers, ringers etc the green light. There has to be as much integrity as possible in a sport riddled with dodgyness. Pool rigging is fine, but not running dogs honestly is not.
|
|
By:
pounf...Have they changed the rules of racing?
Correct weight = pay. So you want the bookies to be the stewards? Fantastic idea.  |
|
By:
So drugging dogs is fine in order to get a coup is it.
|
|
By:
all clear = payout...end of story.
Do you want payouts to depend on the results on drug tests on horses as well? Stewards run racing....not bookies. If I back a horse that loses and later fails a drug test I don't get my money back. The correct thing for them to do is pay the punter, then pursue it legally if they wish. |
|
By:
These 'bookmakers(sic)' just need to be held to the same standards as on-course Bookmakers, & that comes down to a failure in the body handing out the licences, so until the NT Gaming Commission (or whatever it is) realise they have created a monster & that they need to tighten up their regulation of these 'bookmakers(sic)', these issues will just keep occurring.
|
|
By:
99.999999% of time theres nothing untoward, and no need to wait. But money is the root of everything in these instances, and large sums of money mean people will break the rules. You of course are happy with that. Stopping dogs is fair in your world. If no malpractice has taken place the bookie pays. But they are never going to just pay up £100,000 or whatever without looking at it. I suppose you would if it were you.
|
|
By:
IT'S NOT FOR THEM TO DECIDE!!!!!!!!
WE HAVE STEWARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And we bet in fckn $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ |
|
By:
Dont get me wrong, I love seeing the bookies get whipped, and Barney Curley is a legend over here. I`m just playing devils advocate in an interesting debate.
|
|
By:
So I could come over there, stand on the home straight and shoot every dog in front of mine, till mine leads. People will stoop to all sorts of thing to win when theres large sums of money involved. The stewards dont have all the facts, and an official body is currently investigating. If they judge no malpractice then the bookie pays. Otherwise its a cheats charter and how can you bet on anything with any confidence.
I dont understand why the currency is relevant. |
|
By:
The race has been declared as all clear. Simple as that. If somebody started shooting all the dogs in the home straight, it wouldn't be, it would be called off. Yeah? Really?
Race has been declared, bookies pay. Simple as that. Sure they don't like being made look stupid, but this is making them look much stupider than if they just copped it on the chin, paid up, and then changed their rules and waiting for an investigation into the race. There is no reason to conclude that anything untoward has happened. Even if the dogs are on his property, all that means is he knows they were well underpriced. It is not illegal for stables to bet on their horses, for people viewing private trials to lay horses, people watching training on their brothers property laying dogs. Just because things add up, doesn't mean anything untoward is going on. There are so many scenarios that are legit they combat the arguments that it wasn't. But the reality is, all that is needed to be known here, is the race was declared as a race, and official results were posted. Bookies are required to payout on official results. Simple as that. |
|
By:
Whats the difference between shooting dogs on the home straight and drugging all bar the one Ive backed ?
|
|
By:
Nothing. It is exactly the same.
 |
|
By:
There is a difference...the stewards wouldnt know.
|
|
By:
You are right. That is possibly the only difference. Can't imagine there would be any others....
|
|
By:
Theoretically, if all you have to do is get past the local stewards to win huge sums, people will do it. The fact of the matter is there are probably plenty of strokes that go on, but because the sums involved are relatively small and not headline making, nobody bothers. I know I am being far fetched, but its an interesting debate.
|
|
By:
Cant wait for his to play out, someone is going to jail
|
|
By:
Yep, local stewards only. No need to worry about anybody higher than them.
Lets be honest here, we live in a world of racing where it is a rule of racing that your horse must be prepared and raced in a way to give it the best possible chance to win the race, yet it is accepted practise to run a horse on a campaign targetting a race. But the reality of this race, is if the 4 got up, he quite possibly could have still lost money. The reason it paid so much was because the top 2 across the line were the longest priced dogs. Now if he has also manipulated the tote pools, he has played a very risky game. Now common sense says nobody in their right mind would not be betting 5k on a multiple where the win pool holds around the same amount unless they were really rich, stupid, both, or suspect. But the fact remains, they must payout, and then seek damages after the event. It isn't about getting away with it if you get past the stewards, it is about a temporary gain, for potential loss, jail time, and fines, not to mention livelihood of any licensed parties involved. What you are saying is that to profit from an armed robbery, all you have to do is get past the 16 yo Indian working at the local Night Owl. It is ridiculous. |
|
By:
No that is what you are saying. I am saying that the inquiry taking place because of the huge amount and all the circumstances will sort it one way or the other, ie like the Police catching the armed robber. You were saying once the local stewards say all is good (the 16yo Indian) then everybody pays.
|
|
By:
Yes. AFTER EVERYBODY PAYS ffs... WTF?
I really don't think you know what you are saying tbh... |
|
By:
This is just about the most ridiculous thing I have seen.
Wonder if the bloke had a good bet on Smoking Aces or knew any former NSW Harness stewards. Dressed like a bloke who could afford to drop $5k on a lowly Ipswich dishlicker race too. Wish I could. Some grubs have all the luck. |
|
By:
have they established if he was related to the trainer of the fav?
|
|
By:
BJT - you seem confused, are you saying that the local stewards are the final word or not. I am saying that in the vast vast majority of cases they are, but when strokes are pulled involving huge sums are involved they may not be, as an inquiry in to the goings on will almost inevitably take place at the behest of the bookie in the end of the sting. If no foul play, then bookies pay. But to remove that will open pandoras box to the fixers.
|
|
By:
Time to upgrade your computer to something above the 386sx, then you may see the smilies indicating that I was making fun of you for being a ****.
|