Has anyone had any positive outcomes from using IBAS ?

Perhaps you should first review Ladbrokes' Sports Rules:


We accept singles on all games unless otherwise stated.

Unless otherwise stated all rugby bets are settled on 80 minutes play, which includes any injury time added on by the referee.

Where odds for both outright and handicap betting are available, all bets will be settled on the outright price unless you have specifically requested handicap at the time your bet was placed. However, where only handicap betting is available all bets will be settled on the advertised Handicap price and conditions.

Winning margin/correct score betting is from scratch.

If a match is abandoned before 80 minutes are played, all bets on that match are void, except for those markets which have been unconditionally determined. First try scorer bets will stand if a try has been scored at the time the match is abandoned.

If a match is postponed and rescheduled to take place within 48 hours of the original start time, your bet on the match will stand unless cancelled by mutual consent.

If the match is no longer playing at the venue advertised, you bet will still stand. This applies as long as the venue has not been changed to the opponent's ground (or in the case of international matches, as long as the venue remains in the same country).


Unless those rules have been amended since you placed your bet, it would appear that you have no goods grounds to challenge the decision to void. There can be cases where a rule or term can be shown to be unfair and therefore effectively invalid but that certainly doesn't seem to be the case here.

Hi , Thanks for your response . I've just looked into Ladbrokes rules and although the above Rugby rules look like they apply their General Rules are as follows

In the case of Football and other Sports , bets are settled on the official result published by the Press Association (PA), immediately after the match/event is finished. If the PA amends their decision after this period, all bets will stand on their original result. If the result is not immediately available from the PA, the result published by the official governing body immediately the match/event is finished will be used for settling purposes. Any subsequent corrections or amendments to this result will not apply for settlement purposes.

There is then also the following details which seem to be slightly different -

Abandoned matches
If a match is abandoned before Full Time* has been played, bets on the match outcome will be void, unless an official result is declared. Bets on all markets which have been unconditionally determined will stand, for example in American Football, First Touchdown Scorer bets will stand if a touchdown has been scored. Full time is determined by the rules of the specific sport, please refer to any special rules or terms in relation to that sport.


As is probably the case in most instances like this i only looked into the rules after my bets were voided . It does seem very strange though that most major sports including Football , Basketball , Cricket are all settled on the offical governing bodies results even if a game is abandoned .

I was just wondering if their are any offical betting industry guidelines regarding abandonments that they have to follow as it is not always the case that what is written is actual law / rules . Just as a silly / extreme example they could put somewhere in the rules that should there be a winner at higher than 16/1 we can void the bet at our discression  , just because it could be written there it doesn't mean it's lawful .

With regard to Rugby League, I would again suggest that the rule I quoted in my original my post applies or takes precedence over the General Rules.

I don’t concur with your interpretation of their rules with regard to abandoned football matches. In my opinion the Specific Football Rule (described below as (S1)) would apply or otherwise take precedence over the General Rule (G1) that you quoted.

(S1) If a match is abandoned after it has commenced, all bets on that match will be made void except where settlement has already been determined. For example, where the first goal has been scored by a named player the First Goalscorer and Time of First Goal markets, amongst others, will stand.

(G1) In the case of Football and other Sports, bets are settled on the official result published by the Press Association (PA), immediately after the match/event is finished. If the PA amends their decision after this period, all bets will stand on their original result. If the result is not immediately available from the PA, the result published by the official governing body immediately the match/event is finished will be used for settling purposes. Any subsequent corrections or amendments to this result will not apply for settlement purposes.

Please refer to specific rules for individual events.

I would agree that their rules regarding abandoned/called American Sports matches do differ from many other sports and are less open to differing interpretations.

With regard to your final paragraph, regarding unfair terms, I did acknowledge this possibility in my original post (final sentence) but I fail to see how it could apply here.

Those with greater legal knowledge than me may disagree but I fail to see how you could hope to persuade any competent, fair and independent adjudicator, not a description that everyone would ascribe to IBAS, that Ladbroke’ rules were unfair in this instance. 

Perhaps you could induce an act of goodwill from Ladbrokes with reference to your previous custom or other bookmakers that settled on the Wakefield win?

If you your previous custom indicates you to be a ‘sharp’ this is less likely but it may still be a possibility.

Just to let you all know Ladbrokes have now paid me out on my Wakefield margins bets . After a long slog trying to be reasonable with them and getting absolutely nowhere i decided to use the power of social media / Twitter to shame them into it and it really does work . I'm sure Ladbrokes will now have to change some of their rules after i pointed out a few discrepancies .

Congratulations. It would appear that my interpretation of their rules was incorrect in this instance, although, as you observed, there do appear to be some discrepancies.