racingstar, you are glossing over the very simple fact that the amount of money in the customer's account is completely irrelevant to the matched (backer) party of the VDV transaction.

Betfair matched and approved their bet and a number of customers relied on and placed dependent contingencies based on their approval.

It is highly likely that Betfair have previously covered the losses of other events where customer accounts did not have the ability to pay.

If this is proven, they will be asked to cough up the £21m.

I'm not sure that the odds are large as you think Racingstar. The key point if(when) it comes to court is whether Betfair were negligent. Some would think that Betfair would be expected to make their liability calculation 100% solid whatever is thrown at it.

They were not the only backers..

Why, can't you read ?

G2D,
Do you mean the people who backed before the 29.0 appeared ?
It is not a trick question.

It amazes me the attitude of some people on here expecting to bepaid.......Absolutely despicable.
You saw an obvious mistake, tried taking advantage and were rightly told to go jump......


Try winning money in an honest way you clowns

If I want a riddle I will open a Xmas Cracker,G2D.
Either make your point or get off the pot.

Diamond Joe, people who backed VDV could still lose. Yes the odds were attractive, but people lay all sorts of odds on here every minute of the day in-running.

People who back a faller, or a 0-0 scoreline when a goal has already gone in, have already lost. Are you saying the layers, and Betfair for taking their commission on these "illegal" bets, are in the wrong?

It's quite easy to see (well for most people)

If i was under the influence, i would have called you imhotep..

What about the backers after the second or third hurdle with 4 minutes of the race left - why are they in the wrong racingstar?

I seen the "mistake" like everyone else but again like most others they were probably waiting for it to just disappear. If it was a couple of grand that got put up by "mistake" which would have been taken within seconds - should the backers have been paid for that?

Sometimes there law, sometimes there decency..........this is a time when IT failure is the reason for the problem and decency should prevail.

Maybe hard to take if you took a punt on such a large price certainty but sometimes youve just got to be man enough and take on the chin.

Another race coming soon................

I own a Garden Centre (thats my identity revealed) but there are more plants on this forum than in my 30 acres !! Yorkie 1 you have been doing the rounds.Please post as someone else because as I have told you there is a claimant who is making a note of new posters.

At the risk of boring everyone to death...It is up to the punter to manage his position.There cannot be any mistakes on a trading platform or else ...it would not be a trading platform.In a court of law there is no way Betfair will be proven in the right.They might employ the best legal brains in the country (although I doubt that judging by their statement) but even I as a lay person would beat them in Court.....

So if a bet popped up for a couple of grand at 29 after the last and got matched (as it would) should those backers not expect to be paid out, or is it ok for betfair to say it was a mistake and void it?

I honestly reckon if it got to court Betfair would not be getting away without paying something out, T & C's or not.

Maurice,
Most of the Backers will not go to Court on this matter.
Do you know why?

racingstar Joined: 22 Oct 08
Replies: 306 31 Dec 11 21:46   

Pedro,
How could the backer of VLV at 29.0 as it approached the line lose ?

a) jock could have fallen off
b) horse could have broke a leg
c) horse could have swerved (for any number of reasons) and hung away his lead
d) horse could have put a foot in a hole and fallen
e) saddle could have slipped and weight cloth fallen out
f) stirrups could have broken and jock unseated
g) bridle could have snapped and horse unsteerable
etc

Lest anyone think these are made up, they haven't watched enough racing yet.


Homefortea,
I can absolutely assure you that you would not beat BF on this case.

Are you a lawyer, star, you sound rather confident?
Problem for Betfair is that winnable or not, they are faced with something that no other bookie / exchange has faced in betting history, namely a "punter" with a £21m bet and plenty of barristers probably willing to fight his case.

The more publicity the case gets, the more the share price falls. If Betfair want to see this in court, they potentially risk their whole company as the fallout on a whole host of issues highlighted by this case could see them with an even bigger liability.

Is the answer prostate cancer???

best outcome for the PC payers would be if Beftair go into administration.
Then everyeone would have to go purple.
Where they don't have ..... errr hemmm  ..... premium charge

even if the layer didn't want to lay £24m, ie a mistake, but had it in his account, bets would have been settled

What the answer to the question racingstar im dying to know, what do pc payers fear above all else??? If not prostate cancer is it Lorraine Kelly???