We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I recently placed a bet with Lads which was on the "Total 3 Point Shots in game" in a basketball match. I backed 'over 12.5' @ 5/6.
There were 28 3 point shots attempted during the match and Lads settled it as a loser. Upon contacting them they claim that the market was settled as number of successful 3 point shots (of which there were 8).
I then logged in to my account to find that the bet receipt had been changed so that the market now read "Successful 3-point shots made in game".
I have screen shots of the market as it appeared on their site and I also have screenshots of my initial bet receipt, both of which say "Total 3-point shots in game".
Lads have seen these screenshots and still claim they have not doctored my betslip nor changed the market after the bet was, not just struck, but after it was settled. They say they will not therefore resettle (or even void out the market as a palpable error!).
What would you advise me to do? I don't really want to go to IBAS as they are a waste of space (Have dealt with them in the past and a ruling found in favour of the bookmaker despite IBAS admitting there was no way they could know for sure the exact time of a disputed in play goal so gave them the benefit of doubt)
Should I go to the Gambling Commission? Surely, altering bets after they are struck or settled is illegal, or at least against some of their licensing conditions?
Or should I just pursue the matter through the small claims courts? Or are there other alternatives I've not considered?
Thanks in anticipation.
There were 28 3 point shots attempted during the match and Lads settled it as a loser. Upon contacting them they claim that the market was settled as number of successful 3 point shots (of which there were 8).
I then logged in to my account to find that the bet receipt had been changed so that the market now read "Successful 3-point shots made in game".
I have screen shots of the market as it appeared on their site and I also have screenshots of my initial bet receipt, both of which say "Total 3-point shots in game".
Lads have seen these screenshots and still claim they have not doctored my betslip nor changed the market after the bet was, not just struck, but after it was settled. They say they will not therefore resettle (or even void out the market as a palpable error!).
What would you advise me to do? I don't really want to go to IBAS as they are a waste of space (Have dealt with them in the past and a ruling found in favour of the bookmaker despite IBAS admitting there was no way they could know for sure the exact time of a disputed in play goal so gave them the benefit of doubt)
Should I go to the Gambling Commission? Surely, altering bets after they are struck or settled is illegal, or at least against some of their licensing conditions?
Or should I just pursue the matter through the small claims courts? Or are there other alternatives I've not considered?
Thanks in anticipation.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 25
|
By:
Surely it depends what the right price should have been? Not being an expert on basketball it is hard to know. But if the right price for the number of successful shots over 12.5 should have been around 5-6 then I would say Ladbrokes are in the right, and you should not try it on, but if the right price for the total number of shots should have been around 5-6 you are right and they should not try it on.
|
|
By:
What the 'correct' number should be is irrelevant. It is the name of the market which is the key factor. If they had said that the market was incorrectly named and therefore the market voided as a palpable error etc etc I would not have been happy, but I would have accepted the decision.
The problem I have is that they have changed the name of the market in hindsight and then settled the bet as a loser. This seems highly immoral and potentially illegal. If this sets a precedent then bookmakers could theoretically take bets on any event/outcome and then turn around at the end and say "oh, we actually meant xyz, not abc, so your bets are losers" when the result doesn't go their way. |
|
By:
Surely, by your reckoning, every pass made in the whole match could be interpreted as a three point shot.... that was attempted but failed. You surely can't count 3-point attempts. They worded the bet badly and you should argue for your stake back in the interests of fairness as you thought you were betting on (legitimate) 3-point attempts.
But that's the best you can hope for. |
|
By:
If they palp it every one else (who knew what they betting on) would want their money back too.
You have to ask for special treatment, but coming on here may have done you more harm than good. |
|
By:
I would forget IBAS and just go straight to the small claims court. Provided you have good evidence of what the market was originally listed as and you come across as a reliable witness the judges in these courts often side with the smaller of the 2 claimants. Ladbrokes will either not turn up to the court in which case only your evidence will be heard or they will send a barrister down there and that will probably make the judge even more likely to side with you. This is all assuming its for an amount worth claiming for.
|
|
By:
In terms of the bet - I feel it is ambiguous and you probably have a case
In terms of how they have changed the description of the bet after the event, I think is scandalous and deserves to be shown for what it is - a devious piece of sharp practice I wouldnt have confidence in the GC and IBAS in this instance I would suggest you contact their PR top man and threaten court action - whether or not you intend to go thru with it Good Luck |
|
By:
If you threaten court, they may well take the hit as a punishment for retroactively changing yr bet.
Otherwise I am not that sympathetic to your trying to take advantage of an ambiguously worded market and out-of-line price. In such circumstances it is plausible for a bm to claim palpable error. I guess the other argument is that palpable error shd only apply in shops to bets that the customer has written out for himself. |
|
By:
Rafael Nadal 12 May 10 11:08
that's the most sensible option on the thread for me and if you can get away with a void you should take it and run , you're not stupid Ted and knew exactly what you were doing but at least a void as an ex-gratia is reward for spotting a wording flaw that may save the bookie some embarrassment in the future. Good luck. |
|
By:
How did you manage to get screen grabs of the market as it appeared on the site? Did you realise they had made a mistake and wanted to get evidence before hand?
|
|
By:
I reckon Ted is a serial pest (previous with IBAS, taking screenshots), why didnt you contact ladbrokes to make sure it was the correct market?
stop being a nuisance and just bet off you're own back from now on IMO |
|
By:
Moronic.
|
|
By:
An interesting one. I know c0ck-all about basketball, so no idea if that was a fair price or not. However, surely it is up to Ladbr0kes to word their bets in a way which makes it clear to everyone what the bet is about.
Surely, by saying a '3 point shot' rather than a 3 point scored', it sounds as if it is as the punter has backed it. The shot is the act of throwing of the ball, and if it goes in or not, it's still a shot. (if that makes sense) I suspect they realised at some point that it was badly worded and made it clearer - which was really moving the goalposts. They should have honoured the bet taken when they didn't make the requirement clear. I would tend to agree with the small claims court suggestion. Quite honestly, they deserve to be taken to court over it and I also agree that you will probably win the case - or more likely, an out of court settlement. Good luck and don't give up on it!! |
|
By:
Toffee Pops has summed this up correctly,i would say Ted prowls bookmaker sites looking for errors or ambiguity in the wording of markets
|
|
By:
The fact he took a screen grab does suggest he thought Laddies might try and back out. However, that said, doesn't every punter look for a bet where they think the odds are in their favour? If the bookie can't make it clear what bet he's offering, then they deserve to be taken up on their misleading offer. I'm siding with the punter here - and I honestly believe he would win if he took it to court, where the requirement is just to have 'the balance of probabilities' in your favour; which he does.
|
|
By:
You have a good point actualy they should not be able to change a bet placed with out telling you or fofering to refund your money back which they have done neither. If you do have these screenshots and it is worth a bit of money not £10 or something then go to ibas.
Oh and for people asking why he had screenshots, some people take screenshots of all there bets, i know a few people in case something like this happened |
|
By:
I take screen shots of ALL my bets that are not placed on here as do all my mates just incase something like this happens.
|
|
By:
He is an absolute cert to win it, both morally and legally. Give the vultures a week to pay up by sending them a letter by registered post naming a date, stating that if it isn't paid by then, you'll see them in court. You could even put extra pressure on them by naming the day and the court, stating that you will confirm the exact time should they still decide to welch.
It is long odds on that you will be paid before that happens. |
|
By:
Oh, and given past experience, nobody in their right mind would have any faith in the GC or IBAS.
|
|
By:
^^^^
He knows what he is talking about |
|
By:
Get layinglikemaria on the case. he will get your money in about a week
|
|
By:
Can't believe all those having a go at him for betting on the error, i would have done. Bookies are so fair to the punter, how dare we take advantage of their slip? They wreck lives, bar us for daring to win money, change odds without updating their slips in shops, just when you go to get paid.
I would definatley go for the hard push with the court action, at the very least they should settle as an error, depends how much it was or a principle to if you want to go for the whole lot. Error on their part, at the very least it should be your money back. This palp error is boloox as they refund if you win and keep the money if you lose, they can't lose and it sets a bad precedent, if they make a mistake they should stand by it. I backed a rugby side where the odds were 7/4 with Patrick powers and they had it the wrong way round, it should have been 4/9, banged a load on it, got paid and had my account barred, weell worth it and too right i took advantage, one guy on their bots would have paid for it. |
|
By:
How much money are we talking here? Laddies would probably view a £1 bet rather differently to a somewhat larger amount. One says 'casual punter - fun bet', a larger amount would hint at someone trying to take advantage of a poorly worded market.
|
|
By:
IBAS is very unlikely to help you if you aren`t a Bookmaker
|
|
By:
That's true. Many punters with solid cases have lost at IBAS. Brogan has no chance.
|
|
By:
Ted Brogan - Whatever you choose to do, the one thing you absolutely should NOT do is go to IBAS. I can categorically assure you that you will be wasting your time with them. I suspect you would have a chance in the small claims court, and the Gambling Commission might be worth contacting although the best you can probably hope for there is that they say the bet should be voided. On the other hand, your evidence that Ladbrokes have actually altered the wording on the market could be construed as an attempt to cheat which the GC might be very interested to hear about.
|