Sleeper issue. Bookmaker failing to honour bet odds.

its not a bookmaker rule it a finance law.

have you ever wondered where dead people's money goes if a claim is not placed on it,the government pick it up every five years.and some draconian law about a year + one day involving dormant monies is used every day in law courts.

you are a clever boy wild,pity about your personality,you should study karma.

There used to be a year and a day rule when it came to homicides

If your bookmaker was offering Costa Rica @ 50/1 to win the group, it's about 5/1 any combination for 2nd and 3rd, so I would have thought 300/1 about right for the tricast.

Ah, just seen donny's already done the calculation. Sorry!

However, if your bookmaker was not offering 50/1 the group winner, it would explain why their price for the fc was only 80/1. Working from that, it was even money to find 3rd, so 150/1 for the tricast would be about right.

Just out of interest why on earth would you not cash in a massive winning bet immediately?

Yeah i always leave my 700/1 shots to cash when i'm short of money,utter rubbish.You would cash that kind of bet out soon as.5 years later really?

what did he do to get 5 years

I suppose I should not tar all bookies with the same brush, but if you had a large sum of money that you could put in the bank would you let a possible shyster hold on to it for five years & then fully expect without a moments worry that they would had it ALL straight over ?

Is he Norman Stanley Fletcher?

I also agree that the correct price should be around 300/1 but wouldn't surprise me if the bookie had offered 700/1.

Something just doesn't add up here. A massive winning bet, that is held on to for over 5 years before making an attempt to claim it?

If I was the bookie concerned, I would be asking a lot of questions before settling this bet.

I also agree that the correct price should be around 300/1 but wouldn't surprise me if the bookie had offered 700/1.

Why? If the bookies odds for the f/c were 80/1, then it's either Italy or England for the tricast. How on earth would that multiply the return by eight, unless it was a palpable error?

At the moment we know that the BEST price for Costa Rica to win the group was 50/1.

If the company involved were only going 33/1 it's possible that 150/1 would have been their price for the tricast.

I am guessing that virtually all bets the bookmaker had accepted in that group tricast involved England, which he may have all laid at shorter odds. He might have put up 700/1 hoping to simply balance his book.

No, it isn't calculated like that.

Well, has the betting slip got 700/1 on it signed and checked by a staff member?

If I have a winning bet from a top established firm like Billys I'll go out of my way to collect it that day even if I know I'm going to be near the shop the next day - just in case they go bust overnight. Thinking of a winning betting slip as some sort of financial reserve to keep for a rainy day or when you may need a sudden cash boost in 4 years time is a strand of logic that I would need serious convincing of ....

Perhaps the bettor was forced to take a five year vacation from the outside world?

if the single is 50/1 then the fcast at 80/1 is the bet that is out of line, not the 300/1 + tricast

3/5 that uraguay finish above eng and italy, no thanks!

In the original post it's 80/1 for a forecast uruguay then costa rica. That price looks correct, say 2/1 uruguay and 25/1 ish costa rica to come second.

ah, yes of course, its the reverse of the actual winning forecast...my bad

and i was doing so well

Okay Brassneck,
Sorry I was a bit rude but your minimal response which was not related to my question irritated me. When I worked with a bookmaker many, many years ago we had a book and when three months had passed we would scribble down the forgotten bet in a book entitled 'Sleepers' My understanding was a bookmaker was obliged to honour these bets whenever, forever and I don't see why he shouldn't. Before posting my response I phoned Ladbrokes (who are not the bookmaker responsible for this thread) they confirmed they would honour a betting slip whenever, forever. In fact I vaguely remember a story about a family collecting a bet on Red Rum recently. Maybe your right with the law, but bookmakers, I feel do not enforce this in shops. This is a distraction and not the issue.

I understand the interest and queries regarding the whys but really they are not relevent to the issue.

Also thanks for all the calculations, I'm ok with those.

I feel we have enough already to hang them, seeing as they signed off the price with 'PTL'

What I really want is evidence of their 700/1 offer, I have no doubts they offered it. It would bury them.

The purpose of the thread is/was to try and find out some source.

If the betting slip doesn't have 700/1 on it, checked and initialled by a member of staff, your friend hasn't got a leg to stand on.

.....it has 700/1 signed off with PTL 'permission to lay'
Couldn't be clearer.

ok, good chances then.

.....so do the other 5 losing bets he placed on the same group that day at similar prices.....

What is the date/time on the betting slip?

These odds I have copied from his slips


Costa Rica/ England/ Italy  900/1
Costa Rica/ Italy/ Uruguay  600/1
Costa Rica/ Uruguay/ Italy  700/1  winning bet
Costa Rica/ Uruguay/England 1000/1
Costa Rica/ Italy/ England  800/1
Costa Rica/ England/Uruguay 1000/1

The slips are all dated 6 May 2014 21.50..51 etc.

From that I can deduce that Italy were favourites to win the group followed by Uruguay then England then Costa Rica. I would then guesstimate that Costa Rica would have been 100/1 to win the group. If you can prove that the bookmaker concerned went 100/1 Costa Rica to win the group at that date, you are nearly there.

That's proof that the prices were a mistake

All he's done is back CR to win the group and instead of getting 50/1 max he's getting between 99/1 and 149/1.

There can be no arguement that it's a palpable error.

I suspect that your friend has placed many other bets in the last 5 years---- Has he yet to cash in any of them?

That should Be99/1 and 166/1

Btw, if I was a betting shop supervisor (which I'm not) the time of the bets placed and their odds would raise suspicions.

Hmm ... JML
I don't like your post but I see the sense in it.

I will look into this tomorrow, it seems not quite so clear cut to me.

I have a friend who placed a bet on the world cup 2014. He has kept the slip safely until this last month, he was in need of cash.
That doesn't ring true. Nobody leaves a bet that long before collecting surely.

never read such utter bull, since your friend held onto it for 5 years for no reason,  he wont mind you putting up a screen shot and proving all the doubters wrong.....thats everyone that is breathing at present if you were in anyway wondering who the doubters are.

Sounds like a right **** and bull story.

For the twisted baiters, If I was to post the slips I would be revealing the bookmaker involved.
When this is resolved I will post the slips to silence you all.

JML and PP you have valid points which has changed my previously solid opinion on this.
I am due to meet with the Manager on Thursday.
Obviously I want to get the best possible outcome for my friend.

Dont bother with IBAS, go straight to court. If you have ptl on this and all the other slips it would be hard to see you losing the case.

Also you need to know when the price was altered, was it after the bet won? Did they alter the prices of any of the other bets?

Did your friend visit the shop after placing the bets, and did they inform him the prices were incorrect?

Also did your friend go bankrupt?

You need to go through the proper channels and follow procedure. If you can't resolve it directly with the bookmaker, IBAS is your next option. A court won't entertain you unless you have followed all appeal options.

im not sure a manager will settle it fairly, but its next step.


ibas likely wont either.


having seen the other 5 bets i think they will realise at some point what has happened.

...but, ..if your friend ends up with an equivalent payout of less than 50/1
win on costa rica then to me thats obviously wrong, and unfair...

and its still not the most likely outcome of the tricasts, given a costa rica win

i dont see how offering 100/1 about a 50/1 shot is that obviously a palp anyway

if they can void all bets they price up with 1% error we are all stuffed

I've still got the Racing Post's World Cup betting guide for 2014.
Can't find any prices for the tricast but the Costa Rica/Uruguay straight forecast was listed as 150/1 for Baldys,Whills and Paddys

As we thought, which would mean that the tricast (England and Italy would be roughly evens to finish 3rd in this example) would be approx 300/1.

It would only be about 300/1 if the bet was placed with a company that were offering 50/1.

But it's the average odds over the 6 combinations that would be 300/1 and since the winning combination was the second shortest price
it would be closer to 200/1--250/1.Add in the fact that you aren't normally offered full multiplied odds on these types of bets and
the company involved were possibly less than 50/1 on CostaRica to win the group and you can see why only 150/1 was offered.

If the company involved was one of Baldys,Whills and Paddys who were offering 150/1 for the straight forecast then obviously 250/1 would be a fairer settlement


700/1 instead of 150/1,200/1 or 250/1  is as palpable as you can get--the 1% argument is nonsense.


The person who placed the bets knew it was a palpable error and then decided that waiting 5 years would increase his chances of getting paid at the
incorrect prices.

Or they might have been somewhere like Slade (and I don't mean the pop group).

Might still be there.

Any dispute with a bookmaker regarding paymentcan be taken to court.

This would definitely be you best chance of getting paid the full amount.

the 1% is not nonsense, as that is the scale of error involved

we have no idea what liabilities the company may have had on the group, that
may have seen them offer  a bit of value on other bets to hedge their liabilities

you often see books offering 100/1 about a 50/1 shot they have been unable to lay.

Feb 13, 2019 -- 11:39AM, noobile wrote:

Any dispute with a bookmaker regarding paymentcan be taken to court.This would definitely be you best chance of getting paid the full amount.

The court will simply say they can't make a ruling as the correct appeals procedure has not been followed. Even if the court did make a ruling, if they found in favour of the bookmaker, the punter would probably have considerable legal fees to pay.

I think noobile had the small claims court in mind.



A punter has finally been paid £1,000 winnings after a 17 month fight with bookies who refused to honour his bet.

Julius Ndlovu was stunned when they withheld his cash, claiming the 2,000-1 odds on tennis ace Roger Federer to win a set 6-3 against Tomas Berdych were a mistake.

Instead they offered him two free £50 bets as a goodwill gesture.

Julius, 35, refused and instead took William Hill to the civil courts over the bet he placed in May 2015.

The firm contested his claim but after three separate hearings he has finally been sent a cheque for £1,826 - made up of his £1,000 winninings, plus interest and the costs he ran up.

Julius, a nurse, said: “I prepared the case myself and took it to the small claims court myself. They appealed and each time I represented myself and fought against it.”


He says the bookmakers had at least two different barristers representing them.

“By my reckoning it has probably run into thousands in terms of the legal fees they have incurred. It is probable they have spent well over £10,000 trying to save £1,000” he said.

Although he is delighted to be vindicated, he says the matter is not over

“I will be going to the Gambling Commission and complaining about it. It is just ridiculous that this is allowed to happen.

“You couldn’t make it up. The first time they told me they would not be paying out I said ‘what?’ I thought it was wind up.”

William Hill had refused to honour the Rome Masters bet because it said the wrong odds were “human error”.

But Julius said: “Right from the start I documented everything because I did not believe they had made a mistake. I said to them ‘if you have made a mistake, let me see the evidence of that.’ But they would not show me it, despite numerous attempts.”

He added: “It’s not the customer’s obligation to calculate odds and customers should feel confident operators offer odds that are valid and will be honoured.”

After the latest case at Wrexham High Court in north Wales, a William Hill spokesman said: “The court found in Mr Ndlovu’s favour but the judge ruled that the clause relating to palpable error was fair.

“Mr Ndlovu has now been paid in the sum of £1826.99 following his Court claim due to a procedural oversight by William Hill.”

you often see books offering 100/1 about a 50/1 shot they have been unable to lay.

Are you saying that a bookie will go 100/1 on a selection that's trading on about 55s on Betfair in order to take some money on that selection?


And since it happens often it shouldn't take you long to find us a single example.

no i am not saying they would not take the 55 if they can do so without charges making it worse for them

take a look at the golf markets on here on a wednesday/thursday with the usual scramble to lay golfers
as tee off times looms , pushing prices out

last time i attended newcastle races, one bookie was constantly laying the rags
at way over what other books were going, even laying one hoss at 100/1 when
others were flat 33/1

one of his rags won..... and he paid out, without complaint!!!

Which meeting was that at Newcastle donny?

it was mid november, got a free ticket from durham cricket as i'm a member

jumps meeting, friday afternoon ....

Maybe a moody EW race and said bookie was win only.

he was e/w too. one race there was a 1/2 -2/5 shot fav and i backed
a general 20/1 shot at 50/1 e/w ( poss 2 places, not many runners) , i think it came last or second last
and an 80/1 won the race that he had had at 100+... might have been 150/1? trained by kenny johnson iirc, no form,
easy lead...hey ho

Have you answered as to why the bet was not collected straight after the event?

No he hasn't deptford.

depressed 

always a good un

is it normal practice to wait 5 years to collect a large winning bet? do the bookies pay better interest and guarantee to keep your money safe?. For this story to have this many positive responses its worrying, there must be some very gullible people on this forum. Oh why worry about the disclosure of the bookies identity, hardly likely to stop them paying out on a bet they are not paying out on anyway......

The OP's response to one poster was "I understand the interest and queries regarding the whys but really they are not relevent to the issue"

Divorce?

politicspunter • February 13, 2019 12:51 PM GMT
The court will simply say they can't make a ruling as the correct appeals procedure has not been followed

That isn't right.  T@C like "you have to go to arbitration" are unenforceable in the UK under the consumer rights act.

Although you should be able to show that you have made efforts to resolve the issue prior to going to court (which might be what you meant)

dave, yes,  like in an industrial tribunal situation, they will only give you a hearing if you have followed all appeal options.

Not sure I heard a bigger load of rubbish on here..In need of money or not,who in there right mind would leave a 'large sum' there for years..bookie could go bust or you could even drop dead yourself...utter tosh. ..

I think the story has been devised by a few people on here to enable some sort of academic debate.

Feb 14, 2019 -- 1:47PM, eaglewardy wrote:

Not sure I heard a bigger load of rubbish on here..In need of money or not,who in there right mind would leave a 'large sum' there for years..bookie could go bust or you could even drop dead yourself...utter tosh. ..

Someone that was unable to collect it?

3/28/2014 11:18 AM     Multi bet    

Serie A 2013/2014 - Relegation
Catania
AS Livorno, Bologna, Catania

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Uruguay and Costa Rica
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     76.38     1,145.703/28/2014 11:16 AM     Multi bet    

Which team will be promoted from League Two in season 2013/2014?
Scunthorpe
Rochdale, Scunthorpe United, Fleetwood Town, Chesterfield

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Uruguay and Costa Rica
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     70.35     1,055.25

3/28/2014 11:15 AM     Multi bet    

Which team will be promoted from League Two in season 2013/2014?
Rochdale
Rochdale, Scunthorpe United, Fleetwood Town, Chesterfield

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Uruguay and Costa Rica
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     69.01     1,035.15    
3/28/2014 11:15 AM     Multi bet    

Which team will be promoted from League Two in season 2013/2014?
Rochdale
Rochdale, Scunthorpe United, Fleetwood Town, Chesterfield

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Uruguay and Costa Rica
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     69.01     1,035.15     3/28/2014 11:15 AM     Multi bet    

Which team will be promoted from League Two in season 2013/2014?
Rochdale
Rochdale, Scunthorpe United, Fleetwood Town, Chesterfield

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Uruguay and Costa Rica
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     69.01     1,035.15

3/28/2014 11:29 AM     Multi bet    

Which team will be promoted from League Two in season 2013/2014?
Rochdale
Chesterfield, Fleetwood Town, Scunthorpe United, Rochdale

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Costa Rica and England
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    10.00     104.03     -    
    3/28/2014 11:25 AM     Multi bet    

Serie A 2013/2014 - Relegation
Sassuolo
Catania, Bologna, AS Livorno

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Costa Rica and England
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    10.00     111.10     -    
    3/28/2014 11:20 AM     Multi bet    

Serie A 2013/2014 - Relegation
Catania
Catania, Bologna, AS Livorno

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Costa Rica and England
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    10.00     115.14     -

Norman Stanley Fletcher, you have pleaded guilty to the charges brought by this court, and it is now my duty to pass sentence. You are an habitual criminal, who accepts arrest as an occupational hazard, and presumably accepts imprisonment in the same casual manner. We therefore feel constrained to commit you to the maximum term allowed for these offences: you will go to prison for five years.

3/28/2014 11:11 AM     Multi bet    

Serie A 2013/2014 - Relegation
Sassuolo
Catania, Bologna, AS Livorno

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Costa Rica and Italy
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     73.70     -    
    3/28/2014 11:09 AM     Multi bet    

Which team will be promoted from League Two in season 2013/2014?
Scunthorpe
Chesterfield, Fleetwood Town, Scunthorpe United, Rochdale

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Costa Rica and Italy
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     70.35     -    
    3/28/2014 11:09 AM     Multi bet    

Which team will be promoted from League Two in season 2013/2014?
Rochdale
Chesterfield, Fleetwood Town, Scunthorpe United, Rochdale

World Cup 2014 - Group D
Costa Rica and Italy
Uruguay and Costa Rica
    15.00     69.01     -

3/26/2014 3:50 PM     Multi bet    

World Cup 2014 - Group D
1st Uruguay/2nd England/3rd Costa Rica/4th Italy
1st Costa Rica/2nd Uruguay/3rd Italy/4th England

World Cup 2014 - Group E
1st Switzerland/2nd France/3rd Honduras/4th Ecuador
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Ecuador/4th Honduras
    1.30     5134.00     -    
    3/26/2014 3:50 PM     Multi bet    

World Cup 2014 - Group D
1st Uruguay/2nd England/3rd Costa Rica/4th Italy
1st Costa Rica/2nd Uruguay/3rd Italy/4th England

World Cup 2014 - Group E
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Honduras/4th Ecuador
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Ecuador/4th Honduras
    2.15     3171.00     -    
    3/26/2014 3:49 PM     Multi bet    

World Cup 2014 - Group D
1st England/2nd Italy/3rd Costa Rica/4th Uruguay
1st Costa Rica/2nd Uruguay/3rd Italy/4th England

World Cup 2014 - Group E
1st Switzerland/2nd France/3rd Honduras/4th Ecuador
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Ecuador/4th Honduras
    1.25     5474.00     -    
    3/26/2014 3:47 PM     Multi bet    

World Cup 2014 - Group D
1st England/2nd Italy/3rd Costa Rica/4th Uruguay
1st Costa Rica/2nd Uruguay/3rd Italy/4th England

World Cup 2014 - Group E
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Honduras/4th Ecuador
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Ecuador/4th Honduras
    2.00     3381.00     -    
    3/26/2014 3:46 PM     Multi bet    

World Cup 2014 - Group D
1st Italy/2nd England/3rd Costa Rica/4th Uruguay
1st Costa Rica/2nd Uruguay/3rd Italy/4th England

World Cup 2014 - Group E
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Honduras/4th Ecuador
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Ecuador/4th Honduras
    2.25     2961.00     -    
    3/26/2014 3:45 PM     Multi bet    

World Cup 2014 - Group D
1st Italy/2nd England/3rd Costa Rica/4th Uruguay
1st Costa Rica/2nd Uruguay/3rd Italy/4th England

World Cup 2014 - Group E
1st Switzerland/2nd France/3rd Honduras/4th Ecuador
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Ecuador/4th Honduras
    1.40     4794.00     -    
    3/26/2014 3:44 PM     Multi bet    

World Cup 2014 - Group D
1st Italy/2nd Uruguay/3rd Costa Rica/4th England
1st Costa Rica/2nd Uruguay/3rd Italy/4th England

World Cup 2014 - Group E
1st Switzerland/2nd France/3rd Honduras/4th Ecuador
1st France/2nd Switzerland/3rd Ecuador/4th Honduras
    2.50     2754.00     -

Found them.  They'll give an indication of the odds

It is very odd (and foolish) that the bet wasn't collected for five years.  Mebbe he was getting divorced and that is why he didn't cash it in.  Anyhow it is even more odd that someone would make this story up and then odder still that they would make it up and have details about the odds that seem very generous, but these were bets that I took advantage of (on Belgium/Algeria, this one, and the Netherlands/Chile/Australia tricast at massive odds)  Backed Spain to beat Australia in the last game there to secure a good profit on that one).  So I can vouch for the odds detail of this story, which unless you'd actually placed the bets you wouldn't be aware of. I'm therefore 95% confident that the 700/1 is correct, although as I said before, the odds were better on Costa Rica to finish 2nd and 3rd or in Dual forecasts in these bets, than the combinations that actually had them winning the group, although these too were overpriced

The tricast and forecast odds on early lines that included outsiders not finishing last in general were miles out .... 3-4 times the prices they should've been.  I put them in doubles online, with bankers mostly, as a means of getting on.  I got on as singles in betting shops.

clydebank made up the story with another username to aftertime those wonderful bets

fantastic stuff sir

those bets look familiar

eh?

Bito did all them but for double stakes...

"What price were ***** (High St bookmaker) at (time of bet, date) - "

Don't see why Betfair would object, if the OP wants to get down to brass tacks.

Feb 14, 2019 -- 5:25PM, a bitofinterest wrote:

those bets look familiar

The biggest aftertimer on the forum is back. What a clown.

,politicspunters SEETHING


and i never said anything







87K

You only appear when a complete outsider wins and you claim you have bet it after the event. You are a clown.

you cant bet after the event ffs.the markets suspended









21K

Lol, Do you know how stupid you look coming on here post after post, thread after thread, claiming you have backed the complete outsider winner?

21K, ffs.
Get it together, Bito.
I spilt more down the back of the couch on Saturday.

it was a slow day sol

PP,if you're lost you can look and you will find me

I know where to find you, you will be posting that you have just backed the latest 100/1+ winner.

He lays 1.01 losers, ffs.
You need to follow him more closely.

yeah,saturday afternoon




if you fall i will catch you,i will be waiting.... saturday afternoon

Will be owa busy on his FOBT.
Instead of his BOT.

sol knows

Akabula trolling me from forum to forum, thread to thread as usual.