i agree with the palpable error rule but....

if you accept the T&C's then yes.

i took 1.5k off them this weekend but i have to withdraw by bank transfer for some reason.

I can tell you from experience that a bookmaker can BACKDATE his rules and IBAS will still rule in his favour. So I wouldn't go holding your breath on a favourable outcome in ANY situation if you involve them.

hi zola...

not that i would even consider legal proceedings but would this stand up in court?

IBAS have stated before that the palpable error rule may well not stand up in court. It needs to be tested.

STOP PRESS bookie found in anti-winner T&C shocker

:^0 not a chance mate. I don't know how many have even tried. I never heard of anyone getting their money back unless it has involved some good PR for the bookie in question.

With regard to accepting a firm's T&C's when you place a bet, again this will eventually be tested in court under the law of contract. It is possible that a court would deem certain T&C's as unfair.

that said, the rule i am bringing up here is not even a palpable error rule, as i am of the opinion that you need a palp rule because human error is going to happen.

what i am pointing out here is that sporting bet have a rule that gives them the right to void any bet. full stop. !!

The Gambling Commission would also be interested in an operator having T&C's which they considered to be inconsistent with their "fair and open" objective.

Its perfectly reasonable and normal for a company to have a T&C that can be brought into play if they are going to get screwed on an error, technicality, or foul play. If they try to enforce it unreasonably or on a whim they are still liable to a breach of contract as pointed out above. No need to get up in arms just because it is there.

Just because a bookie states that it can take yout firstborn anytime you back a winner doesnt mean it will stand up in court, unreasonable t/c should be ignored because they are legally void. . .

I may be the first person to test the law of contract in court over a betting dispute in the next few months. I'm led to believe following legal advice that I stand a good chance of success.

Zola's Back Heel 21 Mar 19:29
if you accept the T&C's then yes.

So if it says in the rules something like, If we lose more than a monkey on a race we reserve the right to void all winning bets, and you accept these terms, does that make it legal. No it doesnt.

Google UTCCR

That's very interesting information re. the list of contract terms that could be deemed unfair. At least two of them are very relevant to my case.

In the event of any dispute, all decisions made by us will be final.

Palp FICTION

If you lose its VALID, if you win its VOID

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Act is going to be more relevant than the general law of contract.

You can accept to a contract in its entirety w/out being bound to each and every of its terms if any of these terms are found specifically unfair.

Eventually backdating will be tested in court.

I wd guess that some form of the palp. rule will stand up, but that firms will not want to expose it to judicial scrutiny in marginal cases i.e. when they've laid just over bf odds b/c their linesmakers were a bit dozy.

sporting bet will also deliberately create "palpable errors" to catch out arbers.

I've seen it many times with o/u 2.5

sporting bets' rule that they reserve the right to void ANY bet leads me to think they can just go around, voiding off bets they simply dont like and customers are stranded as by opening an account, your are agreeing to the t's & c's when opening up.

can a firm get away with having such a rule?

short answer is yes but under the terms of the gambling act, they have to be open and honest about the way they are operating. if they start being total rats then thats the angle you should take with IBAS.

Ask a good barrister and they will explain the concept of equity to you.

Retaining a rule whereby you can void ANY bet, at your discretion, would have no chance in a court of law. Simply there to try and dissuade you. Forget IBAS in such situations though, total mickey mouse plastic operation. If Chris B does go to court and is successful, it could have some serious repercussions amongst those who have abused the palp rule for a long time.

I remember being palped once (when I could get on with the idiots) by sid J. Their excuse was that a 5/6 should have been 8/11! If that's not abuse of the palp rule I'm not sure what is.

These days the punter power seems to be coming back a little though - recent ASA victories against 0.000365p and bills that have been posted on here give the punter some hope at least against the spin machines of these disgraceful companies. It matters more when there's money on it is my personal favourite.

Now that bets are enforceable by law many of the rules which are enacted totally at a Bookmaker's discretion (ie unfair terms of contract) will be thrown out as unlawful once tested. You can test at a Small Claims Court. Also the Government OFT may take up your case:

http://www.oft.gov.uk/advice_and_resources/resource_base/legal/unfair-terms/guidance#named1

The other issue with palpable error is that a judge will mostly always come down on the side of the non professional where error or negligence applies. That is, the bookmaker is setting the odds, advertising the odds, supervising the odds and training staff to set correct odds. If any of these factors are not carried out it his loss - not the punter's.

fkqmz 22 Mar 14:42
sporting bets' rule that they reserve the right to void ANY bet leads me to think they can just go around, voiding off bets they simply dont like and customers are stranded as by opening an account, your are agreeing to the t's & c's when opening up.

can a firm get away with having such a rule?

short answer is yes but under the terms of the gambling act, they have to be open and honest about the way they are operating. if they start being total rats then thats the angle you should take with IBAS.


Your last sentence is sadly a complete and utter waste of time.

cornubia - I have considered contacting the OFT but they will not get involved in individual disputes, it appears that they will only seek an injunction to prevent an unfair contract term being used in the future.

I am currently advising a client on a case where Hills have said he undertook bonus abuse and as such have closed his account AND kept all his money. They have at this stage acknowledged receipt and I eagerly await their defence.