Michael Bisping VCbet.com Odds Mistake

they will void it - no doubt

the scum will probably wait till he wins before voiding

Yes they can void it.  It is bad news to place bets on obviously wrong prices as you put yourself in a lose/lose position. If your selection wins they claim palpable error and void, if it loses then they are not likely to volunteer to give you your stake back.

No doubt they will void, but give them a call to check where you stand as occasionally they let these sort of bets run.  The main thing is you need to know for sure in advance if you are on or not - and at what odds.

will void and probably close your account

not worth taking this mistakes

*ahem these

Its a joke

Just rang VCbet and they have said its a palpable error. Good job I rang to check because they were going to place it as a 1/4!! Its unfair on the customer because if we made a mistake they wouldnt credit us back

JBHA is exactly right. You wouldn't expect to buy a car for 20 quid if all other stockists were charging 20k, even if it appeared on a website. If something looks too good to be true it usually is.

No point moaning about it, it's been going on for years, your best bet is to point it out and maybe get a bit away at 1/3 rather than 1/4.

i dont agree. they have professional people working for them and companys shouldnt make mistakes like this. If I bet has geniuly been made. They should have to honour the bet.

You had three people telling you the answer and you still seem to be outraged by something that is applied across the board and widely know.

So if Man U are 1/10 at home to say, Wolves..... but someone makes a typo and puts in 10/1, and someone places a bet (larger than you or I would place), say 20k, you honestly think that firm should honour it?

The industry would cease to exist within months.

Good haul.

Of course they should honor it. The industry would not 'cease to exist'. It's just another way that the corporate giants get one over on the little guy, all the rules are in their favour.

What about pro's on betfair? I've backed an evens shot at 1.01 by accident before. I still exist

Also discriminating based on skill should be illegal along with other forms of discrimination [;)]

No closing accounts of customers that beat you.

Or otherwise there should be a health warning when they advertise: Please be advised that in the extremely unlikely event that you do became savvy enough to beat us, we will no longer accept your business.

i would advise going over there, standing over victor and shouting "apologise! apologise!" at him again and again.

or wait till he's kneeling down, then knee him in the face.

Agree with Investor .None of them are going to lay a 20K bet on United @10/1 anyway, max liabilty per punter would be far less, even on those not subject to further restrictions, and i'm sure they will have systems informing them of their increasing liabilties on particular outcomes which would be flagged up very quickly.

I have made 'palpable errors' on here myself. Most notably lumping almost my whole bank at the time (about £500) on a boxer @1.16 , that i'd backed pre-fight (£40@ @11/2) , i was intending to lay him for about £70 backers stake as i, and everyone else following it on the forum , thought it was 50-50 going into the last round .Fortunately he won on a split decision , if he hadn't  voiding the bet was hardly an option.

What makes it ridiculous is , as Curlywurly's reply , they can wait til it's over and assess wether they will be better off voiding or letting it stand.

So a car showroom has a car for sale at £31,000 in its windscreen, the 3 falls off, so you can buy it for £1,000 that sounds like a fair deal.

I think if you go to a restaurant, look at the menu and order a meal for £20 quid and then ask for the bill, and they tell you, oh sorry, we increased our prices to £25 last week but haven't updated our menus, you are within your rights to insist on paying no more than the 'advertised' price.

I think if you go to a restaurant, look at the menu and order a meal for £20 quid and then ask for the bill, and they tell you, oh sorry, we increased our prices to £25 last week but haven't updated our menus, you are within your rights to insist on paying no more than the 'advertised' price.



You can.  But don't eat the complimentary mints that arrive at your table after you have challenged the bill.

It's a case of what can be reasonably be expected, and that is what a judge would do if it went that far. In the above case of course nobody would expect a price of £20 for a meal to be automatically wrong, but equally nobody would expect a company to offer 11/4 on something where everyone else is going 1/4 or simmilar.

You get these threads from time to time and it astonishes me even very experienced punters do not have it worked out properly.

In the UK you have the Gambling Act 2005.  I have demonstrated clearly on here before how that Act makes debts like the one VC Bet have to their client in this case recoverable.  The only time it would not be as far as I can recall is where the client has been party to some fraud, ie match fixing etc.

An important thing to note here is that it is not you who takes their incorrect price.  In ordinary contract law, their advertised price is not binding on them.  You actually make the offer of the bet at that price.  The bookmaker then accepts your offer(or rejects it.)  Once they accept your offer, they have sealed the contract which is now binding on them.  They could perhaps argue that their terms and conditions are part of the contract....but I would think the palpable error rule would have next to no chance of being on the right side of Unfair Contract Terms legislation, for reasons I don't feel like explaining in detail here.

My advice to people is to search the Gambling Act 2005, and actually read it.  Then search Unfair contract terms and study that.

Here is a link I found:

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/unfair_contract_terms/oft311.pdf

Would you think a company could successfully argue that a clause they have hidden deep in their terms and conditions is fair, where that clause allows them to void a contract for a bet where THEY have accepted a client's offer at a price that is palpably wrong, but does not allow the client to void the contract where he has inadverantly had an offer accepted at a price that is palpably wrong?

I don't.  And that is just one of many ways the palpable error rule could be found to be an unfair contract term.  It is not cleraly defined, it is not widely publicised or certain to be known by the client, are just two other ways I can think of off the top of my cranium.

Any amateur lawyer will tell you that in the case of a car salesman accepting a low offer on a car in error, he binds his company to the contract at that price.  It is the same with any shopkeeper or any type of contract, unless there is some fraud on the part of the person making the offer.

The law will not save you from making a bad bargain.  These are words I recall from some time as a student of law.

How come no cases have ever come to court then ?

Probably two main reasons I would imagine.

1.  Punters are generally unaware of their rights.

2.  If someone took one of the firms on by challenging the palpable error rule legally, the firm would be unlikely to let it get to court, settling early.

But dont you tick I have read the Companys rules and regs and accept them before you can open account, doesnt this cover them ?

If I open a website (of any kind) and put in my Terms and Conditions that by opening an account with me, it allows me to negate your human rights, it doesn't mean I've covered myself to come and lock you up against your will etc.

This is obviously an extreme example and bookmakers obviously don't infringe on people's human rights, but my point is that just because something is written in Ts+Cs doesn't make it legal or binding.

But are they not just protecting themselves from human error, say if somebody puts something at 4/1 instead of 4/7

I totally agree with you and have no problem most of the time with the way bookmakers implement palpable errors, I was just pointing out the difference between the law and Ts+Cs.

I would like to see an industry standard in regards to palpable errors. ie some kind of a minumum % difference between the prices before they can be implemented. They should also have to provide proof of what they claim the price 'should' be.

Any business is bound by the actions of its properly appointed agents.  There is no reason why bookmakers should be any different.  If they don't wish to be bound by their agents they should have an alternative system.  A punter should be entitled to have a bet accepted and honoured, regardless of whether it is a bad bargain for one party or the other.  In fact, in my(admittedly amateur) opinion, this would be where the law stands on this issue.

As TB points out, ticking that you accept terms and conditions does not automatically make them operative in your contract with the other party.  Those terms have to be FAIR.  I forget all the legal tests of fairness, but not overly onerous on one party, clearly defined etc etc.  The palpable error rule would pass few of these tests if I am not mistaken.

Don't get me wrong, I am perfectly aware that some bookies abuse this palpable error rule, and these instances can reasonably be taken further. However to suggest that bookmakers cannot have the rule full stop is nonsense, it would be easy to get a friend to get a job with one and "accidentally" make a mistake to cost them a fortune. (How would you prove it to be fraud as opposed to a genuine mistake?) No judge would be stupid enough to give carte blanche to every single person to enforce every single bet or else bookmakers would be bankrupt in no time.

Fraud is the right word.  The Gambling Act 2005 allows that all winning bets are recoverable in law, except those that result from fraudulent conduct. 

It is not for an honest punter who has made an offer of a bet to a bookmaker and had it legitimately accepted to explain how the bookmaker could prove fraud where fraud exists.  It is for the bookmaking firm to have sufficient checks and balances built into its process to ensure fraud does not occur, or that it is easily detectable when it does.

In fact, most bookmakers do have such checks and balances to my knowledge, for major stakes in any event.

As I understand it, by accepting the terms and conditions, which cover the palpable error rule, they are covered if an error is made. Seems sensible to prevent fraud. If any firms abuse it thats when problems arise.
The error at the top is transposed prices, a human input error. The guy got on - he knew it was a wrong price - sometimes you get paid sometimes you dont.
How would he do if he took that to court ?

DE, you can talk about checks and balances all you want, if a £5 an hour cashier accepts my bet on a horse at 1000/1 "by mistake" instead of the actual price of 10/1 - how are you going to prove it was not just that, a genuine error?

Pounf, if something went to court the judge would hopefully make a judgement on what is reasonable for both bookmaker and punter to believe - so if he scribbled down man united to win the league at 1000/1 instead of Blackpool, clearly no-one in their right mind would think that to be correct - but if the bookmaker tries to claim that Man United to win the league was 6/4 rather than the price taken of 2/1, and everyone else was offerring 7/4 or 15/8, I suspect he'd have a job convincing the judge that no-one could have thought it to be genuine!

So in the case above, what would be the verdict - 11/4 a 1/4 shot ?

Turtleshead and pounf - You seem to be saying with authority how you think the law would operate regarding the palpable error rule, but as far as I can tell you are relying on mere myth to support your assertions. 

The applicable part fo the law when dealing with hidden terms and conditions(ie buried in reams of other terms on a bookmakers site) is surely Unfair Contract Terms legislation.  I forget the exact name of the Acts, but I think there are two Acts which apply, the UK Act and the European Act. 

Here are just a few bits from the European Act that I found on Wikipeia:

Regulation 5(1)[n 3] defines the principle of unfair:

If a contractual term has not been individually negotiated[n 4] and

the term causes significant imbalance in the parties rights and obligations, then

the term is contrary to the requirement of good faith.


Then there is this:

The 'contra proferentem' ruleThe 'contra proferentem' rule is that where there is any ambiguity in regards to a clause it is to be interpreted against the party seeking to rely on it. Regulation 7 states this very clearly:[2]

"(1) A seller or supplier shall ensure that any written term of acontract is expressed in plain, intelligible language.
(2) If there is doubt about the meaning of a written term, the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer shall prevail but this rule shall not apply in proceedings brought under regulation 12."


You can search and read about this sort of thing to your hearts content.  But it might be good if you took the time to do a bit of research into the law before writing on here how you think it should or would operate in relation to the palpable error rule, otherwise you are simply guessing and perpetuating myths, the very thing the bookmakers are relying upon to void bets they have  accepted.

I was hoping the common sense approach would suffice, I wouldnt dream of wasting any time researching it (I expect Turtles probably feels the same), I have far more enjoyable stuff to do.

DE - you are one of the few on here who actually live up (or down) to their username...

DE I'm not guessing, or peptuating myths. I am using basic common sense.

The simple point is that if a bookmaker is forced to lay every single bet taken by a member of his company no matter how absurd the price is, he goes bankrupt in no time. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. And for that reason, it won't happen, no matter how many Acts you try to find.

(and I am well aware of the unfair terms in consumer contracts act and the sale of goods act - I have used both of them myself - but it is nonsensical to think they can be used to force a bookmaker to pay out a bet at any price displayed)

Well, if it is 'nonsensical' as you say, it will be very easy for you to show us where in the law your view is supported....

You go to a bank for a loan, the staff member who handles your application signs of on a contract at 3% interest when the going rate is 12% interest, how would the law treat this?  The bank would be held to it. 

Why would it be any different in the case of a bookmaker's staff member agreeing to a bet at a price above the market price?

Pounf - I chose my username for that very reason mate.  You have come on here stating a flimsy case, providing nothing solid to support your view, then cried foul when somebody cared enough to do a little research to set you straight.  Caketaker extraordinaire.  More front than Myers as we say in Australia.  Talk about unmitigated gall. 

Turtleshead

The simple point is that if a bookmaker is forced to lay every single bet taken by a member of his company no matter how absurd the price is, he goes bankrupt in no time. That's not an opinion, it's a fact


You will forgive me if I don't engage you to conduct my defence in the event I am wrongly charged with murder....

ah, that age-old internet favourite: people who aren't lawyers arguing about law. amazed you've all got this far without anyone using the words "invitation to treat".

Jump into the debate or gtf off the thread viva. 

Which side are you on?

since you ask, my instinct tells me that they'll have worded their small print very carefully to cover themselves against a bet placed through the website automatically becoming a binding contract at the time it was struck. and that any legal action attempting to force them to pay up would ultimately fail unless the person bringing it could raise some element of doubt that the price was mistaken.

otherwise all firms however large would run the constant risk of being bankrupted by a single typo, which is patently absurd and unsustainable.

but I'm not a lawyer, so what do I know? night all.

How come I havent heard of any cases that have gone to court then if its such an open and shut case for the prosecution. I will immediately write a scruffy betting slip out with loads of prices during the rush at the counter, get the cashier to sign for them and then count my cash when she has accidentally signed for a wrong price.
Earnest with all your knowledge why dont you advertise for clients who have gotten on wrong prices like the Opening Poster and for a percentage you guarantee them a day in court and  winning result.

The terms and conditions that people agree to with firms,  where they reserve the right to correct palpable errors covers them. its simple.
Or have you not checked each firms terms and conditions ?

How come I havent heard of any cases that have gone to court then if its such an open and shut case for the prosecution. I will immediately write a scruffy betting slip out with loads of prices during the rush at the counter, get the cashier to sign for them and then count my cash when she has accidentally signed for a wrong price.
Earnest with all your knowledge why dont you advertise for clients who have gotten on wrong prices like the Opening Poster and for a percentage you guarantee them a day in court and  winning result.

The terms and conditions that people agree to with firms,  where they reserve the right to correct palpable errors covers them. its simple.
Or have you not checked each firms terms and conditions ?

OOOPS didnt mean to post it twice.

There are reasons I don't offer to run people's cases for them Pounf:

- I am not legally qualified so would not be allwoed to charge.

- Most cases like this one are only really viable as a small claim run by the punter himself.

- There are commercial reasons why it would not be worth my time.


Nevertheless, I am confident that if somebody argued the right case they would win, though I am even more certain they would recieve a full payout before it ever got to a court.

There are a couple of recurring themes in posts about this issue and it is worth responding to them here.

One is that people seem to assume that because large scale betting firms have this palpable error rule hidden in their terms and conditions, that it must be watertight legally.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  This palpable error rule was in existance before the Gambling Act 2005 came into force.  It is my belief that it relied for its power upon the fact that gambling debts were not legally enforceable before the current Act came into being.  That is, the betting firms could make up any ludicrous conditions they wanted and hide behind them because there was no way to force them to pay up on winnings bets anyway.

The palpable error rule has never to my knowledge been tested in any cases.  I am certain there are many hidden terms and conditions constantly being found not to be operative in contracts in many industries because they are found to be unfair.  The mere fact a punter has clicked that he has read and agreed to the terms and conditions does not mean that those conditions do not have to pass the legal tests for fairness to be found to be operative in a contract.  Otherwise of course, Laddies or whoever could hide a condition in there that as soon as you place a bet with them they own your house, and then come and evict you whilst refusing to pay you your winnings into the bargain.  THE CONDITIONS HAVE TO BE FAIR, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU HAVE AGREED TO THEM OR NOT.  Anyone who thinks it through properly should realise that.

Is the palpable error rule fair?

My answer is no, for the reasons given in my earlier posts.  This is not an authoritative legal opinion, just my opinion, based on what I know of the law and betting.  the rule is not clearly defined, it onerous to only one party and beneficial to only one party, it is not clearly stated on betting slips, but hidden away, the decision to implement the rule is judged only by the party who benefits from it....I am sure there are many more ways it is not fair.

How can it be made more fair?

Well, clearly define it for a start.  If a price is more than x% out from the industry price it is a palpable error and the bet should be voided regardless of the result.  This % should be quite high, perhaps 100% difference, but perhaps if it produces a payout of over £10,000.00 difference it can also be enforced.

Have the fairly worded rule highlighted on every betting ticket, not hidden deep in terms and conditions.

Have it protect both the punter and the bookmaker, ie if a punter takes a price more than x% under the industry average, or results in a payout difference of £10,000.00 or more, then this bet should also be voided.

If bookmakers did these things, the rule would certainly be more fair than it is now.

What else can bookmakers do?

The other theme that seems to recur on these threads is that bookmakers will or could be bankrupted by the errors of their staff if held to the bets taken in error at extravagent prices.

Bookmakers can have printed and highlighted on tickets that liability for bets up to £x is the maximum that can be accepted by a front line employee, larger bets have to be checked by a more senior employee before they bind the firm.  This might go some way to allaying people's fears of bookmakers going bankrupt on one unchecked error.  I'm sure people can think of better ways to get the same effect, but this gives you an idea.

If the bookmakers' own systems and hierarchies leave them open to being bankrupted on one typo, then guess what?  They deserve to be bankrupted.

It is a terrible shame that someone hasn't driven a truck through this unfair rule properly as yet, but I am sure it will happen one day.  Perhaps a bookmaker will be foolish enough to declare one of Deadly Earnest's winning bets a palpable error.  If the bet was large enough to justify the fight, I would definitely give it a decent go.

Stop defending the indefensible.  A punter deserves to know with certainty where he stands after making a bet.  It is within the scope of bookmakers to alter their terms and systems to provide that certainty.

DE I agree with a lot of what you say, and in no way am I attemting to defend the rotten firms! I have seen many instances of them acting fraudulently and think that a lot of your ideas are sensible.

I am simply referring to the situation as it stands at present, no firm under present legislation will be forced to pay out an absurd bet which is blatantly wrong and could bankrupt them.

By the way, I won't name the firm, but a few years ago I placed a bet on a coupon in a shop, when it came to being paid out a couple of days later they paid out at a much lower one to which was displayed, they refused to do anything about it. IBAS - you can guess what happened, they basically said they could advertise whatever price they wanted and there was no onus on it to be correct (). I tried trading standards, they weren't really interested and they advised me to get legal advice.

In the end, after consulting the local licensing department of the council, (as luck would have it it was shortly due for renewal) I objected to it being renewed in court, and took the day off work! The firm in question employed two lawyers (I suspect on rather more the £37.50 it would have cost to pay the difference in question! ) Despite undoubtedly winning the argument the judge ruled in their favour, (I believe wrongly so) and I was later told that at the time the decision to award or renew a gaming licence could NOT be appealed, which to put it mildly was patently absurd.

As I was leaving the court, their lawyers came up to me and said that they could have asked for costs to be awarded against me. I told them that was utter rubbish, I was informed by the council that it was like a housing proposal, that people had the legal right to object if they had a valid reason and could not possibly be billed if the decision went against them.

Anyway, having exhausted all other avenues, I got a small credit account with the firm, placed a bet on a horse, laid it here, (It lost, or else I would have simply repeated the process until one did) and deducted what I was fiddled out of by the shop. I then wrote a letter telling them why my payment was short, and told them to whistle for the difference! I got a reply stating the firm was "astonished that I appeared to have got an account to deliberately get back the amount of my dispute with the shop", and, astonishingly "I did not understand that the shop and telephone departments are seperate entities" (). Finally they stated that my credit rating could be affected if I did not pay out in full. To which I replied saying that if they took that route I would register a debt against their shop, and it would affect them much more than me! (That ended the matter)

(In case anyone was wondering, it was before the Gambling Act made bets legally recoverable so I was not able to go down that route)

Turtles - I think you could argue till you`re blue in the face - not a good look for a Gooner - Deadly wont have it. Methinks theres a barrack room lawyer situation here, when a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Having the bookies rules printed on ever ticket ? Theres normally a huge poster on the wall with the rules on, how big does he want betting slips to be ? Ridiculous solution, most people dont read them anyway.

To me its just common sense that the bookies protect themselves in this way, what is wrong is when its abused.

Heres one for you lads ive just redeemed a tenner free bet in laddys, man utd v Arsenal under 2.5 gls @4/5 and Bham v Bolton bham to win draw no bet @19/10 should have been 10/11 if it comes in whats gonna happen ????

Have you written it out on a betting slip or is it on a printed coupon?

Just to clarify Pounf, I am not suggesting all their terms and conditions are printed on each and every ticket.  Just the rules that lead to disputes, like the palpable error rule, and if they want to limit liability for an error, have that on there too.

It could be clearly printed on the back of the ticket with something to draw your attention to it on the back.

Ive written it out on a betting slip i also asked the cashier for the prices, i do the draw no bet thing because about 20%of the time ill get paid for a win if a draw comes in. . .

bridgeboy, if they don't pay you out I would be totally disgusted.

What about the rules regarding which dog tracks you can bet at, or limits to winnings on various sports, or rules regarding overtime or extra time etc etc

In Deadlys world if the cashier puts 1/8 instead of 11/8 on your slip, thats what you get paid at.

Bridge - so you`ve asked for Draw no bet and the incorrect price has been put on. Think its a bit slippery but if you get away with it good luck to you. Dont think you have much argument if the bet ends up being settled correctly.

Looks like a loser anyway, still it was a free bet. . .

Any rules they seek to rely upon in that event, that are not an obvious part of your bargain with them should be on the ticket Pounf, why not?  There are surely only 2 required to protect them from either their own mistakes, or being "bankrupted" by one slip of the pen:

- The palp rule, and

- The limit that can be taken by a front line operator.

Anything else is just small change isn't it?

All the rules are relied upon one way or another, there tens of sports on which betting takes place, or do you think "small change" areas dont count.

What about the cashier putting 1/8 instead of 11/8 on your slip, as I said, in your world thats what you get paid.

If the error costs below the cashiers limit, it should be paid out, because the cashier is trusted to that extent.

If the error is worth more than the cashier's limit, and the cashier's limit is made clear to the punter, then I would not have an issue with the bet being either voided or paid out at the cashier's limit.

I am not looking for a deck stacked in favour of punters, just a fair system.  The palpable error rule, as it stands, is grossly unfair to the punter, as we see in this case, he does not know where he stands, that is not acceptable in any contract, you need certainty.

There is certainty - if a wrong price is given it is corrected. If its not spotted and you get paid bingo. If iot is spotted and corrected its there in the rules.
The only bad part is where disreputable firms use it badly.

eg You cannot call giving 7/4 a 6/4 shot a palpable error, putting 11/1 on a slip when it should be 11/10 is.

You still havent answered what happens if a cashier puts 1/8 instead of 11/8 on your slip, in your world you get paid at 1/8.

WTF are you on about with the cashiers limit ??? I`m beginning to think you dont understand the question

To make it clear Pounf, as things stand, the shop should be made to pay it out in full.

What I am saying about the cashier's limit is that a figure SHOULD be printed ON THE TICKET CLEARLY that limits liability to the cashier's limit(ie some lowish figure that would not "bankrupt" the firm) except where the bet is checked with another more senior employee.   

As things stand, if a martian walks into a betting shop, places a bet on something at 11/8, what is there to say he is aware of the palpable error rule at that time?  He has simply made a bargain with the person apparently in charge of taking bets for the firm, the law should care less whether the firm has a bad bargain.

Further, do YOU think the palpable error rule is fair, such that it would pass the tests of fairness under unfair contract terms legislation?  And do you think it is fair full stop?

To make it clear Pounf, as things stand, the shop should be made to pay it out in full.

So are you saying where a palpably incorrect price is put on a slip, the bet should be paid out at the correct price ?????? Isnt this my argument ??



As for cashiers having a limit - have you ever worked in the industry ? So a shop will have how many kinds of slips ?? The slips have all the rules on them, so each one is A4 in size, and now each cashier - who may have different limits due to experience etc - have their own slips with their individual limits on them....maybe the slips should be colour coded and the cashier dress in the that colour so that when you go to the counter, you know the Jean in the green shirt can take bets on green slips as she has a decent limit, and Joe who`s new, has a red shirt and can only take bets on red slips with lower limits...

Earth calling Deadly...Earth calling Deadly...

Hardly difficult to put every bet worth over £2k or whatever on a different type of contract, with about 2 stipulations printed on it and even ask the punter to sign, rather than your average betting slip.  Anything under that is not going to bankrupt anyone so doesn't matter.  These things are not difficult pounf, they are EASY.

Maybe each customer should bring his lawywer with him every time he goes to the counter ....

Deadly, above you have admitted that where an error is made on a slip, it should be paid at the correct price. Which is all palpable error covers. Now you are digging yourself deeper and deeper into nevernever land...the system hasd evolved into what it is over decades. The bookies who are creating the problem are the ones who abuse the safeguard thats been put in place.

Guys this arguments going round in circles, imo pounf is totally correct i wish de was right but hes not imo. . ..

You never actually answered the questions I put to you Pounf.

Do YOU think the palpable error rule is fair, such that it would pass the tests of fairness under unfair contract terms legislation?  And do you think it is fair full stop?

Are you an imbecile ? Do you think I would argue for something if I didnt think it was fair ???

Nobody puts out palpable errors deliberately. To force companies to honour such things is ridiculous and would open up all sorts of fraud possibilities. Its there in the terms and conditions to protect both parties, though as Ive said mainly to protect Bookmakers. When its abused that is scandalous, but generally it isnt.
Most of these things are data input errors, missing the decimal point, getting the names transposed ie human error. In the ideal world they wouldnt take place, but they do, and Bookmakers want a clause to cover themselves for such errors. Its totally undertsandable.

You admit that if a palpable error is made that shortchanges the customer it should be put right. So I dont see why you keep trying to justify that it shouldnt be the same the other way.

"Do YOU think the palpable error rule is fair?"

I think having one is fair, but clearly some dodgy firms abuse it. That should obviously be condemned and any person who is affected should clearly take legal action.

"such that it would pass the tests of fairness under unfair contract terms legislation?"

Same as above, yes, if it is used sensibly and reasonably to correct blatant errors, such as typos, rather than to get out of a bet when the compiler has made a genuine rick when setting prices.

"And do you think it is fair full stop?"

For the third time, yes, given the above!

It is a shame I don't have more time on my hands, I would take on the case of the o/p, or any similar case with a winning ticket, and bet plenty with any of you that I would get the ticket paid out in full.  I will be soon arriving on your shores so it would have tied in nicely.

Alas, I will be too busy.

On a "No Win No Fee" basis I presume.....my advice is, dont give up the day job...

Arriving on our shores ? It must be a great wrench to have to leave Fantasy Island....

In fact, for all the time spent arguing on here, we may as well have a crack at one of these.  The company in question did not pay their fair share towards the Deadly Earnest retirement fund when I was able to bet with them, so they are fair game.

If the opening poster wants to contact me, my email address is deadlyearnest@hotmail.co.uk, we will see what we can do about collecting on the bet, at no cost to you, and publish the results here. 

In the event that philBWFC takes up my offer, I will bet Pounf or anyone else who cares to take a well intentioned wager(funds to a good cause, that type of thing) that we collect the bet in full.

Over to you PhilBWFC, you've opened a can of worms here mate. 


Will you and others actually back the bookmakers and the palpable error rule with your reputations and cash Pounf?

Thought this thread was dead its now shaping up to be an alltime classic. . . .

Go for it Deadly, we`re all right behind you in this glorious quest (in a kind of observational way), but you must give us a blow by blow account of what happens.

Good Luck.

DE,

I suspect that, if the op takes up your offer, you will achieve full settlement of the bet but I'm far from convinced that you will establish the validity or otherwise of the palpable error rule.

Settling the bet in full appears to equates to a liability of £330 for the firm. Defending the case in the small claims court would almost certainly cost the firm an amount far in excess of £330.

As the case would be heard in the aforementioned court, if the firm won the case they would have no prospect of recouping their costs from the original poster unless the judge ruled the case frivolous. For this reason alone, it would be surprising if the firm didn't settle in full if you pursued the matter in a vigorous and competent manner, as would seem likely.

If they had any doubts about the validity of their palpable error rule they almost certainly wouldn't allow the possibility of a precedent being set for the sake of defending a £330 case like this.

A case involving a 5 figure sum but otherwise similar to that detailed by the original poster, in which the losing side may well be liable for the other sides costs, would be of far greater interest.

Would you be as willing to pursue a case in those circumstances?

For the avoidance of doubt, I wish you and the original poster well and I hope that you achieve your goal of full settlement.

Yes, you've summed up the situation perfectly there jt, getting the £330 paid in full should not be difficult to do.  Of course, whilst getting this ticket paid out in full is unlikely to land a knockout blow on the palpable error rule, we might just give it a little black eye.  It would be nice to establish a path that others could follow if they so chose to collect on winning bets in similar situations.

It is probably of little value to me as an individual to blow the palp rule out of the h2o because I can't bet with any of the bookmakers who apply it, not to any significant stakes anyway.  I just think the rule is unfair in its current format, for the reasons I have given on this thread. And I think the law courts would find it to be unfair.  I have no problem with the notion of bookmakers having safeguards in place to ensure staff errors don't cost them collateral amounts.  This is just not the right solution and I suspect the rule has even been used as a sword rather than a shield at times by unscrupulous bookmakers, at the expense of  perfectly honest punters. 

It is absolutely open to bookmaking firms to improve their systems for taking bets, we should never overlook that.

I suppose what might be good is if there was a bigger case, say well into the tens of thousands of pounds at stake.  I doubt even then any of the main firms would want to defend a case in court, for fear of an inconvenient precedent being set.  In such a case I am sure we could find a few larger scale punters aorund town to chip in for a decent legal represetation.  I would be happy to throw my weight and a bit of my cash behind such a case.

couple of small points:
a) The OP's bet was subject to the laws of Gibraltar, a point which you legal experts seem to have missed.
b) Why would the Martian be betting on anything at 11-8 when he could significantly better odds about his existence and arrival on earth?

Are you sure the bet is not subject to UK law gb?

Well it says clearly in the T&Cs of that company that it is GIB law. No doubt some EU or possibly some UK laws may still apply whatever the T&Cs say.

and as it happens this company has quite fair rules on palps, to me the real culprits are the companies that have a "heads you lose tails you don't win" approach.

Ok, we may have indeed overlooked a very fundamental point here. 

However there are two points to consider. 

First, if you place a bet in the UK online with a firm licenced and based in Gibraltar, in which jurisdiction would a dispute be heard?  Just doing a bit of reading on the net, I can't find a definitive answer to that.  It seems VC have tried before to establish that the UK courts have no jurisdiction over them for bets placed with them online.  I could not find the outcome of that argument or case, and would be very interested if anybody has a definitive answer on that.

Second, if Gibraltar is the jurisdiction for this dispute, it appears gambling debts are not recoverable in law there, and that VC attempted to hide behind this in the case I was reading(the outcome was not resolved at the time the article was written.) 

I need some help from somebody here, but I suspect the British courts would have jurisdiction in the matter, certainly the priciple seems to have been established in the USA, that in most cases the place where the punter makes the bet is the correct jurisdiction.

It is a shame I don't have more time on my hands, I would take on the case of the o/p, or any similar case with a winning ticket, and bet plenty with any of you that I would get the ticket paid out in full.

-------------

I would so take that bet - provided that it was decided on by a judge rather than an out of court, "here's 500 quid, we can't be bothered with the hassle" basis.

as someone else said, the palpable error concept is fair - so long as it's applied in a reasonable way and anyone affected has recourse to independent judgment regarding what constitutes "palpable".

Sometimes views diverge of course viva.  I am pretty certain they would settle even a 50k case out of court, because I cannot see how the law would find this term to be an operative part of a contract for a bet.

It would be nice to get someone on here who specialises in unfair contract terms law to give us some analysis. 

We still have the problem of jurisdiction of course here, but that also appears to be open to debate.

Pardon my ignorance but wouldnt the case have to go through IBAS first rather than going to the courts. If it did, wouldn't the courts just then make their ruling on what IBAS have said if the indiviual then wanted to take it further.

I'm not overly familiar with the intricacies of these things so apologies if I have go this completely wrong.

No.

In my opinion, there is no legal requirement to refer a case to IBAS for arbitration prior to referring the matter to court. Any ruling made by IBAS is not legally binding on either party and a court may rule differently, particularly if it can be shown that the IBAS verdict was unsound.

Courts would normally prefer you go through all available channels first as far as I know.  But I am certain there is no absolute requirement to do so. 

The courts would take little or no notice of anything IBAS says unless the court system has lost all integrity.

to add: for the palp rule to be fair, there also needs to be something in place to make sure the bookies don't benefit from the the losing side of palped bets.

eg, in the OP's case, anyone who had a bet on Bisping's opponent at the wrong price would be very unlikely to realise they could get their stake back. so what's VC done with it?

trying to take as much as you can on a 11/4 shot where the true odds clearly shold be around 1/4 is a potentially fraudulent activity. like withdrawing all your money from an atm that is paying out twice what you asked for.

good job you hadn't greened up by laying on here.