|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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". |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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? |
|
By:
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. |