king johns castle

v i k t o r
k o r al s

thank you but backed e/w with 365

Give 'em a call and BEG them for your money back!

I have know idea what reason you can give them. JUst BEG.

v i k t o r - confirmed yes
k o r al s - confirmed yes
b 3 6 5 - ?
l ad cr ook s - ?
b i l ly mountains - ?
b a ld fr ed - ?
p a t po we r - ?

ok no harm in asking,
can only say no

will prob be "up to " in a mo

v i k t o r - confirmed yes Victor Chandler
k o r al s - confirmed yes Coral
b 3 6 5 - ? Bet 365
l ad cr ook s - ? Lads
b i l ly mountains - ? William Hill
b a ld fr ed - ? Bet Fred
p a t po we r - ? Paddy Power

No refunds from the** at crybet or blu-e s-quare.

3.65 did not refund that is a joke

i think its a disgrace, backed t.woods at 11/2 will have to collect that on sunday night, and tell them where to stick there account,

why should they refund, horse refused to race, same as refusing at a fence. Punters fault if they did their dough.

Why?

Because you want your money back for something you lost on?

Not their fault the horse didnt run. Stop Scrounging and take your hit

just wondered why they should not pay back,as they have refunded 4 the same thing b4 as have other firms,

Trent BJK 10 Apr 20:52
Why?

Because you want your money back for something you lost on?

Not their fault the horse didnt run. Stop Scrounging and take your hit

They backed an Horse in HORSE RACE did it race? NO

they should get their money back

Crazy rule! The horse was never going to run

at the end of the day it TAKES out thebook ......public relations to refund

Asked 365 for a refund, they said no

i had no bet, But personally id boycott anywhere that doesnt refund very poor customer service not giving stakes back on a horse that you backed to race and it had no intentions of racing it was dragged to the line! like buying a tv online and receiving an empty box...

Bookies not refunding over a ''refused to race'' is a disgrace, but a bigger one is not refunding over ''refused to win.''

ive just got my 365 betback as a bonus bet for the stake. i must be a lob!!!!!!

A lot of people upset because they backed a loser. I should ask for my stake back on Erics charm aswell. Refused to jump a fence properly.

jumped it too well

28-1 shot and no refund? Terrible PR from the big firms, the once a year punter should just double up on the lottery this day next year, atleast that helps good causes.

i agree shrewd dude, but its worth a try. erics had no chance, king j would have won btw

Shrewd_dude 10 Apr 21:35


A lot of people upset because they backed a loser. I should ask for my stake back on Erics charm aswell. Refused to jump a fence properly.



To be fair, yours had a jockey on it when they formed a line!

Makes sense for firms to refund as a free bet if they don't want to give the dough, I'd settle for that.

THE RULE IS -' UNDER STARTERS ORDERS' - IT DID - SIMPLE..........LOSER!

But even if you have no jockey the rule has to be 'under starters orders' otherwise you are going to have cases in flat racing where the jockey comes off when the stall opens. Whether or not some or all bookies pay out for PR reasons or not the people saying the rule is a disgrace/con etc. and should be changed are talking rubbish.

And any firm that wishes to apply the rules are within their rights to do so ... not the point. Those who have the ability to see the bigger picture will surely refund in some form though, and those that have shops competing with JC's will have to.

theresbeenagoal is absolutely right. Those of us who have a bet every day can take the hit and understand. The once a year punters who presumably bookies want to attract to bet more regularly will see it as a rip off. Not even ran a yard for their money.

Shrewd_dude 10 Apr 21:35
A lot of people upset because they backed a loser. I should ask for my stake back on Erics charm aswell. Refused to jump a fence properly.


Stupid comment to be honest mate,the horse you back actually did RACE,this thread is about a horse that never even moved it DID get dragged to the line

Got dragged to the line because rather than pull it out the Jockey, trainer, connections etc. wanted it to take its chance and it did so it just refused to race and take that chance. It was given every chance but maybe they should have just pulled it before it went under starters orders so that you could get your money back when it was declared a non-runner. How selfish of connections.

Thats most likely the case unfortunately feel sorry for anyone who had money on it,just remember seeing some old geezer in a suit ragging him to the line,the jockey looked as though he had given up...

That 'old geezer' was the great Arthur Moore. I genuinely felt for him when the horse refused to race.

i think tonight alot of people wont be thinking hes so great

in foinavons grand national all losing bets should have been refunded.
the other horses didn't have a chance to jump the fence.

You're an idiot.

me?

Yes.

because i didnt know who somebody is? seriously pretty pathetic comment

I beleieve it didn't crossed the post! So it should deemed as a non-runner. but the whole world is full of cr oo^s, so i am afraid its hard to get your money m8.

Ridiculous. It should not be deemed as a non-runner because it was under orders. It should be deemed as runner but refused to race.

honestly if anyone bet it they r entitled to lose there dough.....thats the rules...end of

what if the bookies enforced a 4p R4 to all winning bets

how many complaints would we have...

it lost..its a loser...a losing bet


if you get your stake back OK consider yourself lucky,and the bookies generous...

Its a grey area.

carberry was gutted

The ** horse ran. It had the same chance as the other 39.

Unlucky. Stop trying to get something you dont deserve

Jockey should have made the decision,cost myself a lot of money and many many others too!

Who do you work for Trent? Done your dough, boss not happy?

How can King Johns Castle have had the same chance as any other horse in the race given that he didn't have a jockey on board?

Fair enough, the rule is clear, but any firms that don't refund must (a) have done bundles on the race and (b) have taken plenty on the beast - to me it goes to show that previous 'ex gratia' payments are pure publicity stunts cos they haven't laid anything of note on the fúcker in question. Further, in future they don't deserve the once a year/ occasional business that might become more regular that the race attracts. Good on JC and VC.

Didnt have a jockey on board!!!! Where the Feck do you get that from?

Carberry was sat on it looking a tw@t when they jumped.

Just sick of having moaning b@stards who lose and then want something for nothing.

can i have my money back off abbeybraney please i think i was treated as shabbily but oh well life goes on and ill try again next year

did you lay it trent?