General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I normally ignore bonus offers from bookies. (I can't be @r$ed keeping track of how close my investments are to fulfilling the conditional requirements.)
However, I recently accepted one. Very unwisely.
The useless football team I support was playing in a TV game one Sunday afternoon last month.
I had considered having an "interest" £50 on them at the available 2/1.
Idly looking through The Racing Post 30mins before kick-off, my vague intention to invest was re-ignited when I noticed they'd been headlined as a value selection.
The standout price was with an on-line bookie, with which I have an account.
The Internet cafe next to the pub I was in had computer problems, so I placed the bet on the Internet by mobile phone.
The useless bunch comfortably lost.
When next checking my e-mail inbox, I found a "bonus offer" from said bookie.
"Welcome to Mobile!"
It was an offer for a free £50. Obviously, there were the usual conditions: I had to play through my initial £50 stake and the bonus three times within 90 days (i.e. invest another £300) via "Mobile" bets to actually get the £50.
Still a very generous offer.
As I wasn't likely to bet via Mobile too often, I didn't really consider it worthwhile accepting, but there was always the possibility of a bet that might be worth a £300 investment rearing its head. In that case, it would make sense to back the selection via Mobile.
I clicked on the link and - Hey Presto! - the £50 bonus (obviously still a merely theoretical and non-withdrawable "bonus" until I had staked £300) magically appeared to boost my balance, which had been around the £100 mark prior to the "bonus" being added.
I didn't give the bonus a thought. No investment sufficiently attractive to lump £300 on appeared.
I had a half dozen or so bets with the bookie in question, totalling around £300 in stakes as it happens, but these were all placed on-line via normal computer links, not by mobile phone.
Consequently, they obviously didn't count towards reaching the £300 stake requirement that would allow me to get my mitts on the £50 bonus that was shown on my account.
The "bonus" £50 had remained filed at the back of my mind.
I then had a look at my balance and betting history in detail.
My non-withdrawable "bonus balance" had gone up by £110 or so to £160. My withdrawable balance had diminished by the same amount.
What the...?
The relevant "bonus balance" stat still showed that I needed to place another £300 to receive the theoretical £50 that was shown as being in my account.
So when and how had £110 of my money been transferred to the "bonus balance"?
The transferred sum was an odd amount. It did not correspond to any stakes I had placed or the returns on the two winning bets I'd placed since accepting the bonus offer.
What was clear was that the bookie had now moved £110 of my dosh from my account - from which I could withdraw it - to the "bonus balance" where I could not withdraw it... and from where it would presumably be pocketed if and when I failed to fulfil the £300 stake requirement.
I e-mailed said bookie.
"Terms and Conditions" apparently say that on acceptance of a bonus offer, funds staked will be taken from an "active" (but non-withdrawable!) "bonus balance", even if there was enough money in the account to cover the stake without using the "bonus balance".
I can see no such clause in the "Terms and Conditions".
Presumably, returns from bets placed whilst having this "active" (but non-withdrawable!) "bonus balance" go into the "bonus balance"... to be subsequently swiped by the bookie, if the £300 requirement isn't met.
It's a good job my first bet after accepting the offer - an any 4 from 5 & all 5 football perm - only had four winners and returned £150 or so, rather than fully copping and returning £1,000+ really, isn't it?
The bookie hasn't explained where the odd sum transferred has come from. Or explained which stakes on the bets I placed were taken from the "bonus balance".
Nor have they pointed out a clause that makes it clear that stakes - and presumably returns - will taken from - and held in - the "bonus balance" upon acceptance of a bonus offer.
As an experiment, I had a £50 bet with them in midweek, even though I could have got marginally better odds elsewhere. The £50 stake was taken from the "bonus balance" - so they've now only swiped £60.
As another experiment, I withdrew my outstanding "withdrawable balance".
Sure enough, this invalidated the bonus offer... and they swiped the remaining £60 from the sum they'd transferred across to the "bonus balance".
Surely the blighters are not allowed to do this.
They've pinched £60 of my money: not as a result of losing bets, but merely by transferring it to an "non-withdrawable" section of my account... and then pocketing it.
Has anyone else had similar problems?
However, I recently accepted one. Very unwisely.
The useless football team I support was playing in a TV game one Sunday afternoon last month.
I had considered having an "interest" £50 on them at the available 2/1.
Idly looking through The Racing Post 30mins before kick-off, my vague intention to invest was re-ignited when I noticed they'd been headlined as a value selection.
The standout price was with an on-line bookie, with which I have an account.
The Internet cafe next to the pub I was in had computer problems, so I placed the bet on the Internet by mobile phone.
The useless bunch comfortably lost.
When next checking my e-mail inbox, I found a "bonus offer" from said bookie.
"Welcome to Mobile!"
It was an offer for a free £50. Obviously, there were the usual conditions: I had to play through my initial £50 stake and the bonus three times within 90 days (i.e. invest another £300) via "Mobile" bets to actually get the £50.
Still a very generous offer.
As I wasn't likely to bet via Mobile too often, I didn't really consider it worthwhile accepting, but there was always the possibility of a bet that might be worth a £300 investment rearing its head. In that case, it would make sense to back the selection via Mobile.
I clicked on the link and - Hey Presto! - the £50 bonus (obviously still a merely theoretical and non-withdrawable "bonus" until I had staked £300) magically appeared to boost my balance, which had been around the £100 mark prior to the "bonus" being added.
I didn't give the bonus a thought. No investment sufficiently attractive to lump £300 on appeared.
I had a half dozen or so bets with the bookie in question, totalling around £300 in stakes as it happens, but these were all placed on-line via normal computer links, not by mobile phone.
Consequently, they obviously didn't count towards reaching the £300 stake requirement that would allow me to get my mitts on the £50 bonus that was shown on my account.
The "bonus" £50 had remained filed at the back of my mind.
I then had a look at my balance and betting history in detail.
My non-withdrawable "bonus balance" had gone up by £110 or so to £160. My withdrawable balance had diminished by the same amount.
What the...?
The relevant "bonus balance" stat still showed that I needed to place another £300 to receive the theoretical £50 that was shown as being in my account.
So when and how had £110 of my money been transferred to the "bonus balance"?
The transferred sum was an odd amount. It did not correspond to any stakes I had placed or the returns on the two winning bets I'd placed since accepting the bonus offer.
What was clear was that the bookie had now moved £110 of my dosh from my account - from which I could withdraw it - to the "bonus balance" where I could not withdraw it... and from where it would presumably be pocketed if and when I failed to fulfil the £300 stake requirement.
I e-mailed said bookie.
"Terms and Conditions" apparently say that on acceptance of a bonus offer, funds staked will be taken from an "active" (but non-withdrawable!) "bonus balance", even if there was enough money in the account to cover the stake without using the "bonus balance".
I can see no such clause in the "Terms and Conditions".
Presumably, returns from bets placed whilst having this "active" (but non-withdrawable!) "bonus balance" go into the "bonus balance"... to be subsequently swiped by the bookie, if the £300 requirement isn't met.
It's a good job my first bet after accepting the offer - an any 4 from 5 & all 5 football perm - only had four winners and returned £150 or so, rather than fully copping and returning £1,000+ really, isn't it?
The bookie hasn't explained where the odd sum transferred has come from. Or explained which stakes on the bets I placed were taken from the "bonus balance".
Nor have they pointed out a clause that makes it clear that stakes - and presumably returns - will taken from - and held in - the "bonus balance" upon acceptance of a bonus offer.
As an experiment, I had a £50 bet with them in midweek, even though I could have got marginally better odds elsewhere. The £50 stake was taken from the "bonus balance" - so they've now only swiped £60.
As another experiment, I withdrew my outstanding "withdrawable balance".
Sure enough, this invalidated the bonus offer... and they swiped the remaining £60 from the sum they'd transferred across to the "bonus balance".
Surely the blighters are not allowed to do this.
They've pinched £60 of my money: not as a result of losing bets, but merely by transferring it to an "non-withdrawable" section of my account... and then pocketing it.
Has anyone else had similar problems?
Show More
Looks like have been robbed by devious terms and conditions and goes to show you cant rob people and get away with it unless you are in business, there are some useful websites where they have a blacklist of all the bad bookmakers, betfair is not on these lists as exchanges encourage winning as they make a commission on winnings, bookmakers encourage losing as this is when they make there money
but there seems to be practices within both types of betting platform now where customers that win are
perceived as UN-wanted when in fact they all encourage us to win so are in contrary to trade descriptions but of course when these companies do ban them they drum up an excuse and refer to there terms and conditions to get them out.
It would not be impossible for all new customers to make betting companies sign an agreement if wanting your business as this would provide them with protection from many things including addition problems, perhaps a gambling charter is needed in this area that then would make gambling sites globally more acceptable , the usa would be one area that would benefit from this sort of idea and finally open it up to the betting public.
P.S. sorry to here about your problem.
but there seems to be practices within both types of betting platform now where customers that win are
perceived as UN-wanted when in fact they all encourage us to win so are in contrary to trade descriptions but of course when these companies do ban them they drum up an excuse and refer to there terms and conditions to get them out.
It would not be impossible for all new customers to make betting companies sign an agreement if wanting your business as this would provide them with protection from many things including addition problems, perhaps a gambling charter is needed in this area that then would make gambling sites globally more acceptable , the usa would be one area that would benefit from this sort of idea and finally open it up to the betting public.
P.S. sorry to here about your problem.
I take it that's bet 3 6 5? I was just about to take up an offer they have on man u chelsea, but reading this i don't think i will, thanks!
Ideally you should lay back the qualifying bets here on similarly priced selections in order to fulfill the t&c thereby copping the bonus for zero risk.
3 6 5's offers are excellent but you need to be fully aware how to play them through should your bet win
Cheers, guys.
Hi, Vis. You may remember me from the Rugby Forum a couple of years or so ago as... er... hang on. I think I wound you up on there. Bets keep schtum.
Anyway...
Yeah, Vis.
I agree. It is indeed Mr. William Roseff's bunch we are talking about. Their offers are excellent. Question is, how can anyone be fully aware how to play them through if the "Terms & Conditions" don't mention key points?
Here's the "T&C" page for their offer:
1. Qualifying bets must be a minimum of £1.
2. The maximum bonus that can be claimed is £50.
3. To receive your bonus, place a qualifying bet through Mobile at b-e-t365 on the sports and markets of your choice. You will need to rollover your initial bet and bonus 3 times on our Mobile service prior to making a withdrawal.
4. If the stake rollover requirement for this bonus has not been met within 90 days of the first qualifying stake any funds held in the bonus balance will be forfeited.
5. Offer closes 22:59:59 GMT 31/10/2011.
6. Residents of the following countries are not eligible for this offer: Russia, Ukraine, Armenia, Vietnam, Belarus, Croatia, Serbia, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Slovenia, Georgia, Moldova, Macedonia, Romania, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, China, Taiwan.
7. The offer code must be entered within seven days of the qualifying transaction. If a withdrawal or transfer out is actioned before the offer code is entered then any previous transactions will not count towards the initial qualifying criteria or subsequent rollover requirements.
8. Players can only have one active bonus at any one time. To claim another bonus the current active bonus must be completed or closed first.
9. Any bets placed containing selections at odds of less than 1/2 (1.5) will not count towards any rollover requirement.
10. Bets placed on asian handicap, goal line and Baseball money line markets, both pre-game and In-Play do not count towards any rollover requirement.
11. Bets placed on Financials which are closed early will not count towards any rollover requirement.
12. Bets placed on Instant Games will not count towards any rollover requirement.
13. Where any term of the offer or promotion is breached or there is any evidence of a series of bets placed by a customer or group of customers, which due to a deposit bonus, enhanced payments, free bets or any other promotional offer results in guaranteed customer profits irrespective of the outcome, whether individually or as part of a group, b-e-t365 reserves the right to reclaim the bonus element of such offers and in their absolute discretion either settle bets at the correct odds, void the free bets or void any bet funded by the deposit bonus. In addition b-e-t365 reserve the right to levy an administration charge on the customer up to the value of the deposit bonus, free bet or additional payment to cover administrative costs. We further reserve the right to ask any customer to provide sufficient documentation for us to be satisfied in our absolute discretion as to the customer's identity prior to us crediting any bonus, free bet or offer to their account.
14. All b-e-t365 offers are intended for recreational players and b-e-t365 may in its sole discretion limit the eligibility of customers to participate in all or part of any promotion.
15. All customer offers are limited to one per person, family, household address, email address, telephone number, same payment account number (e.g. debit or credit card, neteller etc), and shared computer, e.g. school, public library or workplace. We reserve the right to withdraw the availability of any offer or all offers to any customer or group of customers. Offers only apply to customers who have made a real money deposit with b-e-t365.
16. b-e-t365 reserves the right to amend, cancel, reclaim or refuse any promotion at its own discretion.
The point is, nothing in those "Terms & Conditions" mentions that bets I make immediately after claiming the bonus are being made with theoretical "bonus bank" money, rather than "real" money that was sitting in my account.
The bonus was "active" in the sense that it was shown as being part of my balance, but it was ring-fenced and I couldn't withdraw it, as I'd made no bets that fulfilled any part of the qualifying criteria.
Does the "If you can't win, then you can't lose" maxim apply here?
Let's suppose I had £200 in my account. I then claimed the theoretical bonus of £50, taking my balance up to £250.
I place a bet of £50. It loses.
Where would b-e-t365 take that stake money from?
The "real money" balance or the "bonus balance"?
Surely they'd deduct the loss from the real money, wouldn't they?
(I can't say for certain, as the first bet I had after claiming the bonus was a winner.)
If they take that losing stake from the "bonus balance", it would wipe out the "bonus balance" and the bonus offer - meaning I had no chance to play-through my stake & balance three times... meaning I had no chance of actually collecting the £50 bonus... in turn meaning I had no incentive to bet with b-e-t365.
Let's be clear here: the purpose of offering turnover-related bonuses is to encourage punters to bet with the firm making the offer. With the prospect of a free £50 on the horizon for staking £300, a punter looking to make a £100 bet may well take 11/10 and place that £100 with the firm making the offer, rather than take 6/5 with a rival.
Assuming the stake for a losing bet would be taken from the "real money" balance, how the hell can they justify taking the stake for a winning bet from the "bonus balance" - and then allocating any winnings from that bet to the bonus balance as well?
Isn't that, "Heads I win, tails you lose"?
I assumed I was betting with the "real" money that was in my account prior to taking b-e-t365 up on their bonus offer: money I would have lost, had a placed a losing bet; money that would have given me a return in the event of me placing a winning bet.
It seems not. It seems I was placing bets with "bonus balance" money: bets that would see me lose money in the event of a losing selection; but not be paid in the event of a winning selection unless I met the "bonus" criteria.
I reiterate here that the sum transferred to the "bonus balance" did not correspond to any amount I staked or won, so I'm still puzzled as to why that sum was transferred and which bet or bets it related to.
They can't be allowed to get away with this.
Hi, Vis. You may remember me from the Rugby Forum a couple of years or so ago as... er... hang on. I think I wound you up on there. Bets keep schtum.
Anyway...
Yeah, Vis.
I agree. It is indeed Mr. William Roseff's bunch we are talking about. Their offers are excellent. Question is, how can anyone be fully aware how to play them through if the "Terms & Conditions" don't mention key points?
Here's the "T&C" page for their offer:
1. Qualifying bets must be a minimum of £1.
2. The maximum bonus that can be claimed is £50.
3. To receive your bonus, place a qualifying bet through Mobile at b-e-t365 on the sports and markets of your choice. You will need to rollover your initial bet and bonus 3 times on our Mobile service prior to making a withdrawal.
4. If the stake rollover requirement for this bonus has not been met within 90 days of the first qualifying stake any funds held in the bonus balance will be forfeited.
5. Offer closes 22:59:59 GMT 31/10/2011.
6. Residents of the following countries are not eligible for this offer: Russia, Ukraine, Armenia, Vietnam, Belarus, Croatia, Serbia, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Slovenia, Georgia, Moldova, Macedonia, Romania, Poland, Portugal, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, China, Taiwan.
7. The offer code must be entered within seven days of the qualifying transaction. If a withdrawal or transfer out is actioned before the offer code is entered then any previous transactions will not count towards the initial qualifying criteria or subsequent rollover requirements.
8. Players can only have one active bonus at any one time. To claim another bonus the current active bonus must be completed or closed first.
9. Any bets placed containing selections at odds of less than 1/2 (1.5) will not count towards any rollover requirement.
10. Bets placed on asian handicap, goal line and Baseball money line markets, both pre-game and In-Play do not count towards any rollover requirement.
11. Bets placed on Financials which are closed early will not count towards any rollover requirement.
12. Bets placed on Instant Games will not count towards any rollover requirement.
13. Where any term of the offer or promotion is breached or there is any evidence of a series of bets placed by a customer or group of customers, which due to a deposit bonus, enhanced payments, free bets or any other promotional offer results in guaranteed customer profits irrespective of the outcome, whether individually or as part of a group, b-e-t365 reserves the right to reclaim the bonus element of such offers and in their absolute discretion either settle bets at the correct odds, void the free bets or void any bet funded by the deposit bonus. In addition b-e-t365 reserve the right to levy an administration charge on the customer up to the value of the deposit bonus, free bet or additional payment to cover administrative costs. We further reserve the right to ask any customer to provide sufficient documentation for us to be satisfied in our absolute discretion as to the customer's identity prior to us crediting any bonus, free bet or offer to their account.
14. All b-e-t365 offers are intended for recreational players and b-e-t365 may in its sole discretion limit the eligibility of customers to participate in all or part of any promotion.
15. All customer offers are limited to one per person, family, household address, email address, telephone number, same payment account number (e.g. debit or credit card, neteller etc), and shared computer, e.g. school, public library or workplace. We reserve the right to withdraw the availability of any offer or all offers to any customer or group of customers. Offers only apply to customers who have made a real money deposit with b-e-t365.
16. b-e-t365 reserves the right to amend, cancel, reclaim or refuse any promotion at its own discretion.
The point is, nothing in those "Terms & Conditions" mentions that bets I make immediately after claiming the bonus are being made with theoretical "bonus bank" money, rather than "real" money that was sitting in my account.
The bonus was "active" in the sense that it was shown as being part of my balance, but it was ring-fenced and I couldn't withdraw it, as I'd made no bets that fulfilled any part of the qualifying criteria.
Does the "If you can't win, then you can't lose" maxim apply here?
Let's suppose I had £200 in my account. I then claimed the theoretical bonus of £50, taking my balance up to £250.
I place a bet of £50. It loses.
Where would b-e-t365 take that stake money from?
The "real money" balance or the "bonus balance"?
Surely they'd deduct the loss from the real money, wouldn't they?
(I can't say for certain, as the first bet I had after claiming the bonus was a winner.)
If they take that losing stake from the "bonus balance", it would wipe out the "bonus balance" and the bonus offer - meaning I had no chance to play-through my stake & balance three times... meaning I had no chance of actually collecting the £50 bonus... in turn meaning I had no incentive to bet with b-e-t365.
Let's be clear here: the purpose of offering turnover-related bonuses is to encourage punters to bet with the firm making the offer. With the prospect of a free £50 on the horizon for staking £300, a punter looking to make a £100 bet may well take 11/10 and place that £100 with the firm making the offer, rather than take 6/5 with a rival.
Assuming the stake for a losing bet would be taken from the "real money" balance, how the hell can they justify taking the stake for a winning bet from the "bonus balance" - and then allocating any winnings from that bet to the bonus balance as well?
Isn't that, "Heads I win, tails you lose"?
I assumed I was betting with the "real" money that was in my account prior to taking b-e-t365 up on their bonus offer: money I would have lost, had a placed a losing bet; money that would have given me a return in the event of me placing a winning bet.
It seems not. It seems I was placing bets with "bonus balance" money: bets that would see me lose money in the event of a losing selection; but not be paid in the event of a winning selection unless I met the "bonus" criteria.
I reiterate here that the sum transferred to the "bonus balance" did not correspond to any amount I staked or won, so I'm still puzzled as to why that sum was transferred and which bet or bets it related to.
They can't be allowed to get away with this.
Hi Jane, when you consider that many legal bookmakers were spawned form illegal bookmaking per-legislation and that so may have jumped on the band wagon knowing its easy money and you can avoid paying winners out and ban them at will without recourse is it any wonder that there are thousands around now.
On the other hand if its a choice between them and casino owned sites like 888 that are owned by
the dudes that ran Vegas all those years ago and shove money into the back pockets of senators
to keep on-line gambling away in the states while they get the first rights to have on-line gambling then I would rather use a bookmaker, in saying that why should we use any bookmaker or casino powered site when we have fair exchanges of which there are only a handful but there a breath of fresh air and although having charges for all winning types they do want you to win as its in there interest for them for you to do so, exchanges don't make anything from losers as they dont get charged only the winners.
I reckon from what you have told us that this company has taken your money wrongly and you must complain to a regulatory body to get your money back.
On the other hand if its a choice between them and casino owned sites like 888 that are owned by
the dudes that ran Vegas all those years ago and shove money into the back pockets of senators
to keep on-line gambling away in the states while they get the first rights to have on-line gambling then I would rather use a bookmaker, in saying that why should we use any bookmaker or casino powered site when we have fair exchanges of which there are only a handful but there a breath of fresh air and although having charges for all winning types they do want you to win as its in there interest for them for you to do so, exchanges don't make anything from losers as they dont get charged only the winners.
I reckon from what you have told us that this company has taken your money wrongly and you must complain to a regulatory body to get your money back.
Bookmakers have given gambling and sports associated with them a very bad name by creating a whole
culture of mug punters and addicted gamblers, god help all the young lads you see now perpetually going into bookmakers and playing the roulette machines as bookmakers are now the new casinos andI can see a whole new wave of young lives being blighted by this approach and real sports betting that requires a levey to be paid is shoved into the background if possible to try to lower there charges
to the levy boards as money is diverted into the machines thus not having to pay a levy on this money sink.
culture of mug punters and addicted gamblers, god help all the young lads you see now perpetually going into bookmakers and playing the roulette machines as bookmakers are now the new casinos andI can see a whole new wave of young lives being blighted by this approach and real sports betting that requires a levey to be paid is shoved into the background if possible to try to lower there charges
to the levy boards as money is diverted into the machines thus not having to pay a levy on this money sink.
Tell them to give your money back or you will sue them in court. Simple as that, really.
This case does sound fairly despicable. I've taken on various types of these offer, and I've never experienced anything like this. I've never known the bonus balance to be raised for no apparent reason. Obviously if you had £100 in there, and that became £150 with the bonus, and you then lost £100, you wouldn't be able to withdraw any money. However, that's very different from what's happened here.
You are sure there isn't a second bonus offer running, aren't you? (I know their T&Cs say only one can run at any one time, but it's always worth checking what bonus offers you have available.)
You need to demand that they provide you with a full break-down of where and why each sum of money has been transferred to the bonus balance. Tell them if they don't do this, you will be taking legal action. If you look online, you should be able to find full details of the bets you have placed, and any sums of money that have moved around from one area to another. That might give you a few more clues.
Do you still have a copy of the Terms and Conditions that applied directly to this offer?
You are sure there isn't a second bonus offer running, aren't you? (I know their T&Cs say only one can run at any one time, but it's always worth checking what bonus offers you have available.)
You need to demand that they provide you with a full break-down of where and why each sum of money has been transferred to the bonus balance. Tell them if they don't do this, you will be taking legal action. If you look online, you should be able to find full details of the bets you have placed, and any sums of money that have moved around from one area to another. That might give you a few more clues.
Do you still have a copy of the Terms and Conditions that applied directly to this offer?
What the terms and conditions say means diddly squat, tbh.
I could invent my own bookmakers, and put in my t%cs that anyone who bets on a football game which is found to be fixed agrees to forfeit their entire balance.
The fact is, of course, that it would have zero relevance and get laughed out of court were I stupid enough to enforce it.
...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/2083/contents/made
Unfair Terms
5.—(1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
(2) A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.
(3) Notwithstanding that a specific term or certain aspects of it in a contract has been individually negotiated, these Regulations shall apply to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of it indicates that it is a pre-formulated standard contract.
(4) It shall be for any seller or supplier who claims that a term was individually negotiated to show that it was.
(5) Schedule 2 to these Regulations contains an indicative and non-exhaustive list of the terms which may be regarded as unfair.
I could invent my own bookmakers, and put in my t%cs that anyone who bets on a football game which is found to be fixed agrees to forfeit their entire balance.
The fact is, of course, that it would have zero relevance and get laughed out of court were I stupid enough to enforce it.
...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/2083/contents/made
Unfair Terms
5.—(1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
(2) A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.
(3) Notwithstanding that a specific term or certain aspects of it in a contract has been individually negotiated, these Regulations shall apply to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of it indicates that it is a pre-formulated standard contract.
(4) It shall be for any seller or supplier who claims that a term was individually negotiated to show that it was.
(5) Schedule 2 to these Regulations contains an indicative and non-exhaustive list of the terms which may be regarded as unfair.
The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999
1999 No. 2083 Regulation 5 btw.
1999 No. 2083 Regulation 5 btw.
I've been asked to phone b-e-t365. I'll do so when I've got time to endure a lengthy phonecall.
They've now offered to recredit the bonus that has been removed from my account.
That's not good enough - I won't be using my account again after the conclusion of this farce.
LordBobbbin, the T&C's above are the conditions attached to the offer.
I do not have any other bonus offers open. I got a free bet when opening the account, but that was years ago. There was also another conditional bonus offered when opening the account, but, if I did provisionally accept that at the time, I certainly didn't meet the conditions to receive it and it would have expired ages ago. My balance has been down to zero on many an occasion since I opened the account.
The specific clause on which b-e-t365 deem this matter to hinge is condition 3:
"You will need to rollover your initial bet and bonus 3 times on our Mobile service prior to making a withdrawal."
I can't see how anyone could take that to mean ANY withdrawal, rather than withdrawal of the £50 bonus, and it certainly doesn't remotely hint that any bets I place while having that phantom £50 sitting on my balance will be staked from that phantom £50... with returns ring-fenced accordingly.
They've now offered to recredit the bonus that has been removed from my account.
That's not good enough - I won't be using my account again after the conclusion of this farce.
LordBobbbin, the T&C's above are the conditions attached to the offer.
I do not have any other bonus offers open. I got a free bet when opening the account, but that was years ago. There was also another conditional bonus offered when opening the account, but, if I did provisionally accept that at the time, I certainly didn't meet the conditions to receive it and it would have expired ages ago. My balance has been down to zero on many an occasion since I opened the account.
The specific clause on which b-e-t365 deem this matter to hinge is condition 3:
"You will need to rollover your initial bet and bonus 3 times on our Mobile service prior to making a withdrawal."
I can't see how anyone could take that to mean ANY withdrawal, rather than withdrawal of the £50 bonus, and it certainly doesn't remotely hint that any bets I place while having that phantom £50 sitting on my balance will be staked from that phantom £50... with returns ring-fenced accordingly.
Well you're absolutely right. Condition 3 most definitely doesn't allow them to do any of the things they've done here. And, as you say, it most certainly doesn't allow them to take £110 of totally unrelated wins and add them to the existing ring-fenced bonus. These bonus offers don't preclude you from making any withdrawal at all. They just mean you can't withdraw the bonus £50 without first going through the required amount of bets.
Presumably you don't give a stuff about their stupid bonus, but you do want to be able to withdraw the £110 that you've made. Email them to this effect and make it clear to them that you'll be ringing them tomorrow about it and, when you do, you'll be shouting at them! Probably they'll see it's not worth their effort and will just let you withdraw the money without you having to phone them. Also make it clear that you'll be closing your account unless you're satisfied with the outcome - even if you have no intention of betting with them again, it's probably worth making them think they may get some future business from you if you're adequately compensated. (Being given the £50 offer without having to meet the requirements would be a start!)
They've obviously been in touch with you about this already, so you probably have the name of a person who you're corresponding with. Make that person aware that you'll be asking for them by name - they won't want to be personally shouted at, so that may push them into trying to resolve the issue before you've had a chance to phone up.
Presumably you don't give a stuff about their stupid bonus, but you do want to be able to withdraw the £110 that you've made. Email them to this effect and make it clear to them that you'll be ringing them tomorrow about it and, when you do, you'll be shouting at them! Probably they'll see it's not worth their effort and will just let you withdraw the money without you having to phone them. Also make it clear that you'll be closing your account unless you're satisfied with the outcome - even if you have no intention of betting with them again, it's probably worth making them think they may get some future business from you if you're adequately compensated. (Being given the £50 offer without having to meet the requirements would be a start!)
They've obviously been in touch with you about this already, so you probably have the name of a person who you're corresponding with. Make that person aware that you'll be asking for them by name - they won't want to be personally shouted at, so that may push them into trying to resolve the issue before you've had a chance to phone up.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539