General Betting

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
26 Oct 19 19:23
Date Joined: 05 Feb 02
| Topic/replies: 6 | Blogger: HowardStauntonsUncle's blog
Skybet are demanding bank statements etc to prove that funding came from me...Do they have the right to do ths and block the account until i provide all private nformation to them?
Pause Switch to Standard View Is skybet an honest company?
Show More
Report HowardStauntonsUncle October 26, 2019 8:24 PM BST
Have others had bad experiences with skybet confiscating funds on the grounds that someone else funded an account?
Report peckerdunne October 26, 2019 9:34 PM BST
try horse forum
Report starship October 26, 2019 10:28 PM BST
had three accounts with skybet
one in my own name, got restricted, so was only playing poker for about  year,
got account frozen and was asked to send documents,
only had £3.86 in account, so did not bother.
got a mates account, he must have done his absolute bo$$olks,
i was given a free £5 bet every week, got a good run,
was restriced plus my mate was a bit hooky, so withdrew funds,
lucky to get paid, not by skybet but by my mate.
third account, got it two weeks ago,
this guy lost but not a lot,
as i now restricted after six bets
Report HowardStauntonsUncle October 27, 2019 8:57 AM GMT
Thanks for the feedback...i am trying to discover what happens when they conclude that a third party has funded an account. Do they retrospectively cancel winning bets like sporting bet does?
Report starship October 27, 2019 1:32 PM GMT
tell them that u r not sending your bank statement because you have been a victim of fraud.
you are willing u send documents to prove who you are,#
and if you want to withdraw money and they say no,
tell them you are going to the police to report them

ps i do not believe they can demand your bank statements,
you can send a bank statement to prove who u r,
but delete any transfers and incoming,
just leave your name
Report starship October 27, 2019 3:01 PM GMT
By law they can only ask for means to identify the person holding the account.
Bank statement is not needed an electric bill with photo I’d is enough
They already have your all the bank details they need if they suspect money laundering. Any company or organisation has to have a court order to see your bank account
Report dave1357 October 27, 2019 6:13 PM GMT
Nor sure precisely what the problem is.

Is the account in your name and did you deposit with someone else's card?

if so you're in breach

9.3 When using a debit card, credit card or online payment service, You must make sure that the name on the card or payment service is the same as the name used for Your Account. We are entitled to assume that You are using Your own funds and we accept no liability where that is not the case. We reserve the right to void any bets and withhold any winnings placed with third party funds.

but probably an unfair term and (if a one-off) you could threaten court action.

If you deposited with your own card, just blank out all statement info except the relevant deposit. If they give you grief tell them they have 30 days to pay or you will go to small claims court.

If the account is in someone else's name and their card, then you need to persuade them to provide the info.

If someone else's name and your card, then you would have get them to take action.

btw if you have been buying accounts to get round restrictions then you might be best to suck up the loss.
Report longbridge October 28, 2019 12:05 PM GMT

The short answer is "yes they do".

And they'll use Anti Money Laundering as a means to justify doing so in law.
Report HowardStauntonsUncle October 28, 2019 2:37 PM GMT
A friend has been placing bets there in their own name using their own debit card..but it is someone i gave a loan to and sky are demanding to see their bank account just prior to them depositing there to see the source of the funds. They have sent proof of id and address...not good insists on seeing the full unedited bank statement. If that is sent and they see my loan on it (a transfer) and i have been banned from betting at sky in my name...what will happen to my friend's bets and winnings?
Report dave1357 October 29, 2019 9:40 AM GMT
skybet is part of the group that owns pokerstars/betstars (and is merging with betfair).  Stars allows account transfers between players, so de facto third party funds. This would indicate that there is no legal impediment to 3rd party account funding and lend more weight to any argument that the account term I quoted above was unfair.

If the account holder has a regular income, I would supply a statement with: the most recent income installment and the sky deposit showing, and everything else deleted.

btw if your friend has used your computer or internet connection it is quite likely that they strongly suspect what has happened and you are probably best to stop digging and supply an unedited statement and fall back on the "but 3rd party transfers allowed by stars" argument.
Report dave1357 October 29, 2019 9:44 AM GMT
btw here is an extract from stars help pages

Transfer feature is intended to help players fund their accounts so that they can play at our tables.
You are able to transfer funds from winnings, but for security reasons, players are unable to transfer funds originating directly from deposits or other transfers.
All transfers are subject to review before they can be approved.
If you wish to stake other players without playing at the tables yourself, we recommend that you send funds to these players using a money transfer service outside of our site.

Note the bolded para.
Report HowardStauntonsUncle October 31, 2019 4:21 PM GMT
Cheers Dave...yes i think sending them the unedited bank statement is the only hope...they wont do anything unless that is done.
Report starship October 31, 2019 4:32 PM GMT
Download Adobe PDF Editor I think it's around £19.99 for a lifetime account and scan the bank statement in and edit your name out for another one or even a company name
Report Nebs October 31, 2019 5:59 PM GMT
We reserve the right to void any bets and withhold any winnings placed with third party funds.

Ask around for losing accounts, tell them you funded those accounts and the losses were yours. But in light of these new facts you'd like your money back please.
Report starship October 31, 2019 7:04 PM GMT
not only will they withold the winnings but also the oringal stake.
if they were forced to pay back money if you could prove if was funded by a third party,
it would be as big as PPI.
had a bet lately, not your money,
you could be will elidgable for a refund,
plz phone this number......
Report CONER November 2, 2019 12:55 AM GMT
just a joke
Report CONER November 2, 2019 1:01 AM GMT
when they ask for bank statements and christ only knows what else,just take them to small claims court,up to 10 grand cost you aprox 80 pounds,they pay with no probs--and you get the fee back.
Report Dr Crippen November 2, 2019 9:40 PM GMT
Aren't Sky offering best odds so that if you take a price and the SP is bigger they pay the best of the two?

Also I believe they're running a free bet scheme, where say you have five bets of a fiver each in a week they give you a free fiver bet.
Report starship November 3, 2019 10:31 AM GMT
yes, to try and get people to lose their money,
but like all firms if you show a sign of that u know what u r doing, u r quickly restricted
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 3, 2019 11:34 AM GMT
Skybet have an automated system whereby if you take a bet that is flagged up as an arb the account is instantaneously restricted or marked.
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 3, 2019 11:47 AM GMT
There was B365 case where the source of funds wasn't disputed as coming from a third party.  The returns came to close to £1m.  The case was due to go to court, but shortly before it did, AFAIK, Bet365 settled.

So unless it goes to court the answer is unknown, but the likelihood is, it would be deemed in court that they can't.  They are banking on the account holder not taking them to court, which in all probability, if they are correct, they won't.
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 3, 2019 12:17 PM GMT
So, it seems that they are hiding behind a condition, that they don't even know is true, and that probably would be termed unlawful, to welch on a winning bet.  I'd say that was dodgy.

Personally, I see no reason for restricting accounts at all.  Bookmakers just need better systems in place (just like Pinnacle do) to cut the price of good bets.  They should spend as much time and money into doing that as they do in restricting accounts.
Report Dr Crippen November 4, 2019 11:52 AM GMT
Restricted accounts?

What were they doing betting with bookies when the odds are better on here, and knowing that their accounts would be restricted should they win?

Pinch of salt.
Report Dr Crippen November 4, 2019 12:03 PM GMT
The bookies are on the spot here, if they deny restricting accounts they're telling everybody that they don't think anyone can win long term. Which used to be the case.

But by letting the public think they stop winners all the time, sends out a message that they can be beat and are simply protecting themselves.

Which is enough to keep most punters thinking they can win once they get it right.
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 5, 2019 2:32 PM GMT
The odds are better on here most of the time but often there is little liquidity or no liquidity, often the market might not be offered, or if it is no one is willing to provide it, and sometimes the exchanges are not best price.  Often it's a good idea to take the slightly lower price with some bookies, and then bet it on here afterwards.  And if there is good liquidity for a change, then you have to take a step back and ask why, and then if you are still confident, consider the cyclical effects of the premium charge, meaning it's preferable to back it at a slightly lower price elsewhere to avoid that. 

One could just stick wuith the simple message "What were they doing betting with bookies when the odds are better on here
"  After all simple messages resonate more, despite being meaningless without good knowledge, and is why as a nation have been fooled into voting for BREXIT.

Back to why I don't think it's necessary to restrict accounts, and just concentrate on the price.  First, is because good prices are likely to get taken anyway.  Second, is the bookies have an advantage over players betting on here as they know who's taking their odds and can act accordingly.  Third, is because in most cases they control their prices and have the technology to cut prices instantly after a bet is struck.  Fourth it saves money and resources that go into selecting accounts.  Fifth it avoids bad publicity.

The one area where I see potential issues are where they don't control the prices.  IE when they are taking racecourse shows for horse racing and dog racing.  But they've always had that problem anyway and certainly do shorten horses SP on occasions.  There are also potential issues with bad ew multiples on the horses.  It may well be that traditional ew bets get mothballed for win and place betting in the future.
Report Dr Crippen November 6, 2019 2:30 PM GMT
After all simple messages resonate more, despite being meaningless without good knowledge, and is why as a nation have been fooled into voting for BREXIT.

Or fooled into voting to remain, especially if you chop off half the sentence like you did with my quote. And in so doing distort the message.

This is what I wrote with regard to claims of restricted accounts.

''What were they doing betting with bookies when the odds are better on here, and knowing that their accounts would be restricted should they win?''

So what about the part of my sentence you chose to ignore?
Report ItsMeSwaddle April 22, 2020 3:13 PM BST
About time a few more took a pinnacle style model.

Arbing welcome.

Trust your odds to an extent.

A breath of fresh air.
Report VardonVoo. April 30, 2020 4:34 AM BST
@ ClydeBank "and is why as a nation have been fooled into voting for BREXIT."

You don't think the Eurozone was doomed to eventual failure after the Greek tragedy-stroke-p!ss-take?

What we now have to avoid next is being dragged down the same toilet as the Yanks when the dollar bubble finally bursts.

The worry is that we have no oil and, thanks to Gordon Brown's market-bottom-defining sale, we don't have much in the way of gold reserves.

Mind you, Iceland seem to have bounced back pretty quickly after a spectacular collapse, so it can be done.
Report go racing April 30, 2020 8:58 PM BST
SKYBET are absolute scum.......gave them driving license, passport, utility bill. two bank statements and still won't pay out after accepting 60 are these thieves getting away with it?
Report pulio May 6, 2020 7:14 PM BST
they are scum. I was limited to pennies after two bets.
Report pmbets May 17, 2020 12:25 AM BST
A friend of mine had 2 bets then was restricted.First bet lost at even money.The 2nd bet he took 9/4 but the horse eventually went off at 7/4 and won.
This was enough for them and they restricted his account to betting pennies.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.


Instance ID: 13539