Dealings with SpreadEx

I had an account with Spreadex and Sporting Index which I used mostly for 50-25-10-5 bets on horseracing. Both accounts were closed even though I only won a small 4 figure sum over a period of six months approx.

They can charge you interest, but write tham a sob story, redundancy etc. and it's likely they will cancel the interest imo.

As you've been paying them monthly for two years with interest, they might even write the balance off.


Pity you hadn't posted two years ago!

Strange they can charge interest on this. Its a debt but surely its not legally a loan. Bet if this went to court you'd win as you have nearly paid back all the money. Can't see how they can charge interest. You have not entered into a credit agreement with them so i think you should only have to pay back the amount you owed them. Unless they have it in their t&c's. These firms should not be allowed to let people bet with money they don't have in their account.

Unless they have it in their t&c's



They do anfield. Far better to write tham a sob story imo.

i think i have a problem, given the lack of replies, you've had, I can only guess that the traders/punters on here  haven't had an spread account with these firms. Also, your'e lack of interest suggests to me I've been caught in the net and you're a bull$hitter....



Don't worry, I've been caught in the net on more than one occassion....

"Unless they have it in their t&c's"

"They do anfield. Far better to write tham a sob story imo"

Doesn't make a jot of difference if it is in their t&cs or not, quite frankly.

Have they acted fairly? Reasonably?

I think not. I've never heard of a bookmaker adding on interest to gambling debts. Especially as if your credit rating was that poor you should never have been allowed to owe that much.

Get some proper legal advice, but you can start with googling "The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999"

I would tell them that you are going to pay back the balance of 1k, and if they want any more, they can take you to court (1.01 they won't)

Good luck. (If this is a serious thread)

TheMaskedAvenger, no offence, but anyboby on here with spread betting experience will know that, not only do spread firms have different rules from bookmakers, but thay also are a law upon  to themselves. They have greater powers than credit card companies. If I'm wrong, no doubt somebody on here will have me stood correteds prompmtly.

*correctly

ffs, promptly.

"TheMaskedAvenger, no offence, but anyboby on here with spread betting experience will know that, not only do spread firms have different rules from bookmakers, but thay also are a law upon  to themselves. They have greater powers than credit card companies. If I'm wrong, no doubt somebody on here will have me stood correteds prompmtly.

No offence taken, stewartyb. However, you are wrong.

The only difference that used to be the case from a legal point of view was that spread betting debts were recoverable. Obviously this has changed so that all gambling debts are recoverable since the Gambling Act came into force in 2007.

To say "they are a law unto themselves" makes no sense whatsover, they have to abide by the laws of the country they are registered in and take bets from. (I am of course assuming that the OP lives in the UK).I would be almost certain that adding on any form of interest to a gambling debt, let alone the extortionate amount indicated by the OP would be deemed "unfair" under the UTCCR that I referred to previously.

My original advice stands.

TheMaskedAvenger, where I think the confusion lies is in the term 'bookmaker.' Pre-2007. Spread firms operated under the same rules as traders if I remember correctly. ie. if you bought shares, you had to pay for tham within a certain number of days. (14 or 28 days being the maximum.)

Anyways, that aside, the OP doesn't seem too keen on getting an answer, therefore, I will let the matter go.


When I said they were a law unto themselves, I was speaking pre-2007, when,if I'm correct, they could make credit card companies look like angels compared to what interest rates they could charge if you defaulted.

It is quite correct that pre 2007 they operated in a different manner and were more like companies who sold shares, this was because they were regulated by the FSA, (I assume they still are?) as opposed to bookmakers who were effectively unregulated.

But I still maintain that they would have no legal basis for charging anything like that amount of interest (if anything!)

Don't forget, it was found that banks were acting unfairly by charging a customer up to £40 simply for a cheque bouncing or being overdrawn by a few pence. Maybe it needs another court case here to decide if this is the same

This customer clearly got in way over his head and the company were unquestionably negligent in allowing him such a level of credit.

Despite this, they have paid back almost all of what they owe over a reasonable time frame in a responsible manner.

I've calculated that the person has paid back £292 per month on the original debt, and for a normal situation this would be paid off in another 3-4 months. As it is, he will be paying this amount for an additional year.

I've further calculated that he is being charged a rate of 2% per month, and he will have paid almost 4k in interest on top of the original 8.

Many companies have had to write off debts (either in part or in full) when a person has got into financial difficulty. They are lucky that the OP clearly has shown that they are willing to repay it.

It's probably more than they deserve for not doing proper checks on him, I see no reason why they should be enriched as a result.

Don't forget, it was found that banks were acting unfairly by charging a customer up to £40 simply for a cheque bouncing or being overdrawn by a few pence.



This matter actually went to the Supreme Court, no I'm not based in the US!! I don't have all the facts to hand, but they were in fact deemed to be unfair, but not illegal.


Credit card charges were deemed to be illegal and customes got,and still are, getting their money back.


You may or may not have heard of Martin's money tips, (his surname escapes me) but if you can get into his website, (free) there is nobody in the country more up to speed in these matters.

*Martin Lewis is his name.

Just as a matter of interest, I was trying to look out my old Spreadex t&cs book withous success. However, although they were regulated by the FSA, these cretins have as much power as the United Nations. (hence the credit crunch and the fact that fred the shred was allowed to gain the posistion he reached instead of being on the minimum wage).

And the fact that Bosnia was allowed to happen. (UN) Having said that, I'm pretty sure that if you got into debt with a spread firm, it was classed  as a secured loan,in which case your home would have been at risk unlike CC companies which are unsecured.

I may be wrong on this matter, and as things have changed, the terms and conditions which I tried to retrieve will no doubt have changed.

Easy to google Spreadex, but I can't be bothered, although it would be interesting to know if it was a 'secured loan' several years back.

Don't forget, it was found that banks were acting unfairly by charging a customer up to £40 simply for a cheque bouncing or being overdrawn by a few pence. Maybe it needs another court case here to decide if this is the same Confused


Heres a cracker for you TheMaskedAvenger from today's paper......



Bank faces probe call......



"It comes after radio 4's Money Box found Santander customers overdrawn by £100 for []28[/b] days must repay £200-an APR of 819,100 per cent.

Yes you read that figure correctly. Where are the FSA for this cracker?????


That figure doesn't even come close to the legalised money lenders allowed to operate on our high streets in our country.


I'd rather borrow from Paul Ferris......

Ferris would have run a credit check on you and your whole family. . . .

Ferris would have run a credit check on you and your whole family. . . .




Not mine, but even he couldn't beat that bank with -an APR of 819,100 per cent......