Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
All the feedback I've read on this forum about IBAS has been negative so when I felt aggrieved about an issue with Sportingbet I didn't hold out much hope however they've just found in my favor. Here's the story.
It goes back to an offer they were running during the Tingle Creek where if Sprinter Sacre won by 10 lengths or more they would pay out at EVENS and not as the 1/2 that was the price widely offered. Sprinter Sacre duly did the business & went & won by 15 lengths so when I was only paid out at 1/2 I contacted customer services to be told that "all free bets, bonus's & enhanced odds did not apply to my account because their traders had ruled my account ineligible for such offers". Now I've never received any such notification from Sportingbet in an email or via any other form of communication. I have had it from other bookies but not from Sportingbet. Even when I was logged into my account Sportingbet.com was pushing this offer onto me and advertising it when I placed the bet so I felt treated very unfairly.
So I complained to IBAS, they've taken less than 1 month to come back to me and here is their ruling in full:
1. A Sportingbet customer complains that the company failed to honour an advertised offer to pay out at the enhanced odds of evens if Sprinter Sacre won the Sportingbet-sponsored Tingle Creek Chase at Sandown on December 2012 by 10 lengths or more. The horse won by 15 lengths but the company settled his bet at 1/2.
2.) Sportingbet have stated that the offer was for "recreational" customers only and that they excluded the customer from the offer because his account was factored for arbitrage betting and bonus abuse. They point to Para 9 of the offer's terms and condidtions which said: 'Sportingbet reserves the right to refuse a promotional offer to a customer where Sportingbet reasonable believes that such customer has historically or is abusing or defrauding the free bet system, for example engaging in arbitrage."
3.) A bookmaker's terms and conditions are the key point of reference for IBAS adjudications but we also consider whether those terms & condidtions can be held to be fair. While we would not necessarily accept that "arbitrage" amounts to fraud (it has long been an established practice in bookmaking after all) it is within a bookmaker's rights not to offer a bonus to each and every client.
4.) In our opinion, however, the restrictions on the offer have to be made clear when it is advertised (a requirement of the Advertising Standards Authority) and to be applied fairly.
5.) In this instance the panel do not believe Sportingbet have applied their rule correctly. The rule gives them the right to refuse the offer to selected customers but by accepting the bet without notifying the customer he was not eligible for it we do not believe that they have applied the rule fairly. In our view "refusing" means just that - telling the customer at the time of bet placement that the offer is not available to him.
6.) In the panel's opinion the advertised offer (which did not state clearly any restrictions) was an integral part of the betting contract between Sportingbet and their customer and obviously could have induced the customer to bet with the company rather than with another bookmaker. We do not therefore see any justification for withdrawing the offer retrospectively.
7.) The panel therefore adjudicate in favor of the customer.
This was never about the money but more the principle of the way I was treated. Clearly if you honestly believe that you have a case against a bookmaker don't be afraid to take 20 minutes out of your day to submit an appeal via the IBAS website, that's all it took & this was the response.
I'm going to donate the enhanced payout winnings to the Samaritans. I did consider a gambling charity such as Gamcare but they are mainly industry funded so it didn't feel quite right. Hopefully anyone with a gambling issue will call the Samaritans before doing something stupid so I think that my (sporting bet's) money will do more good there...
It goes back to an offer they were running during the Tingle Creek where if Sprinter Sacre won by 10 lengths or more they would pay out at EVENS and not as the 1/2 that was the price widely offered. Sprinter Sacre duly did the business & went & won by 15 lengths so when I was only paid out at 1/2 I contacted customer services to be told that "all free bets, bonus's & enhanced odds did not apply to my account because their traders had ruled my account ineligible for such offers". Now I've never received any such notification from Sportingbet in an email or via any other form of communication. I have had it from other bookies but not from Sportingbet. Even when I was logged into my account Sportingbet.com was pushing this offer onto me and advertising it when I placed the bet so I felt treated very unfairly.
So I complained to IBAS, they've taken less than 1 month to come back to me and here is their ruling in full:
1. A Sportingbet customer complains that the company failed to honour an advertised offer to pay out at the enhanced odds of evens if Sprinter Sacre won the Sportingbet-sponsored Tingle Creek Chase at Sandown on December 2012 by 10 lengths or more. The horse won by 15 lengths but the company settled his bet at 1/2.
2.) Sportingbet have stated that the offer was for "recreational" customers only and that they excluded the customer from the offer because his account was factored for arbitrage betting and bonus abuse. They point to Para 9 of the offer's terms and condidtions which said: 'Sportingbet reserves the right to refuse a promotional offer to a customer where Sportingbet reasonable believes that such customer has historically or is abusing or defrauding the free bet system, for example engaging in arbitrage."
3.) A bookmaker's terms and conditions are the key point of reference for IBAS adjudications but we also consider whether those terms & condidtions can be held to be fair. While we would not necessarily accept that "arbitrage" amounts to fraud (it has long been an established practice in bookmaking after all) it is within a bookmaker's rights not to offer a bonus to each and every client.
4.) In our opinion, however, the restrictions on the offer have to be made clear when it is advertised (a requirement of the Advertising Standards Authority) and to be applied fairly.
5.) In this instance the panel do not believe Sportingbet have applied their rule correctly. The rule gives them the right to refuse the offer to selected customers but by accepting the bet without notifying the customer he was not eligible for it we do not believe that they have applied the rule fairly. In our view "refusing" means just that - telling the customer at the time of bet placement that the offer is not available to him.
6.) In the panel's opinion the advertised offer (which did not state clearly any restrictions) was an integral part of the betting contract between Sportingbet and their customer and obviously could have induced the customer to bet with the company rather than with another bookmaker. We do not therefore see any justification for withdrawing the offer retrospectively.
7.) The panel therefore adjudicate in favor of the customer.
This was never about the money but more the principle of the way I was treated. Clearly if you honestly believe that you have a case against a bookmaker don't be afraid to take 20 minutes out of your day to submit an appeal via the IBAS website, that's all it took & this was the response.
I'm going to donate the enhanced payout winnings to the Samaritans. I did consider a gambling charity such as Gamcare but they are mainly industry funded so it didn't feel quite right. Hopefully anyone with a gambling issue will call the Samaritans before doing something stupid so I think that my (sporting bet's) money will do more good there...
Show More
Sportingbet not paying out on a special bet , now theres a surprise ..
congrats on this, I am not sure if unsporting grease the palms of the IBAS head honcho, maybe not.
What a pleasing thread, much better than Deltas. 
He's got a thing about that lass, CG, should she be worried? 
Some years ago I took action against a bookmaker for the 1st time ever
I thought I had a genuine cause for complaint, my case was dismissed out
of hand by Ibas. Ibas are totally bookmaker funded, you did well to win.
I thought I had a genuine cause for complaint, my case was dismissed out
of hand by Ibas. Ibas are totally bookmaker funded, you did well to win.
I would love to know their definition of a "recreational customer"
"recreational customer" *Something which resembles a drinking vessel with a handle.
Windsor boy is the definition of a recreational punter.
(You also drink tea/coffee from them (Larger than a cup)).
(You also drink tea/coffee from them (Larger than a cup)).
chelsea girl, true
so I put the groom one up for you to enjoy!
so I put the groom one up for you to enjoy!
well done on both counts, a nice news story for a change.
"recreational punter", definition from Collins dictionary - "mug punter"
Well done.
It's a pity that bookmakers are allowed to put the like of "abusing or defrauding the free bet system, for example engaging in arbitrage" in their rules in the first place, as IBAS have suggested. But I guess there's no-one with the power (or the interest) to stop them, OR IS THERE? (thanks Tommo).
It's a pity that bookmakers are allowed to put the like of "abusing or defrauding the free bet system, for example engaging in arbitrage" in their rules in the first place, as IBAS have suggested. But I guess there's no-one with the power (or the interest) to stop them, OR IS THERE? (thanks Tommo).
I'm going to donate the enhanced payout winnings to the Samaritans.
Good on ya Sir,and well done
Good on ya Sir,and well done
The score is stoozbet 1 sportingbet 1000 (the number of other punters they refused to pay out and who didn't complain to IBAS).
How do you prove arbitrage without access to the customers betfair account imho
@IanP Sadly you may be right. That was part of my reason for posting it too as I can't be the only one..
Thanks for all the nice messages. It has kicked my week off very well!
Thanks for all the nice messages. It has kicked my week off very well!
@Biscar I think it's laughable that they would think I would be mad enough to hand that kind of value back to other exchange punters!
Well done mate.
Surprised IBAS didn't dismiss it out of hand after SB's claim of "because his account was factored for arbitrage betting and bonus abuse" as is usually the case when they throw those magic words out there.
Surprised IBAS didn't dismiss it out of hand after SB's claim of "because his account was factored for arbitrage betting and bonus abuse" as is usually the case when they throw those magic words out there.
While we would not necessarily accept that "arbitrage" amounts to fraud
Although I have just noted that line. Says all you need to know about IBAS. Not necessarily?
Although I have just noted that line. Says all you need to know about IBAS. Not necessarily?
Well done , I had a similar case against the same company ,whereby I had an e/w double ,which they accepted.
A couple of hours later they emailed me to say the bet was now void. By now I was at Doncaster races cheering the
bet on .The races had finished by the time i read the email.I appealed to Ibas and ,under the ruling that the bet had been accepted in the first place ,found in my favour .Hope this helps anyone else who find themseves similarly placed .
A couple of hours later they emailed me to say the bet was now void. By now I was at Doncaster races cheering the
bet on .The races had finished by the time i read the email.I appealed to Ibas and ,under the ruling that the bet had been accepted in the first place ,found in my favour .Hope this helps anyone else who find themseves similarly placed .
Well done Stoozbet, think you may have created a "precedent" for all other claimants to cite in similar claims. Your permission may be required to use the findings and decision of the arbitration service(word for word)in your case for any future dispute that goes to IBAS.
It also defines that a "recreational customer" may use the exchanges without being deemed to be trading, thus using the benefits of a promotional offer with another bookmaker/exchange is not termed as fraudulent practice. What you do with a third party is your private business and remains so.
It also defines that a "recreational customer" may use the exchanges without being deemed to be trading, thus using the benefits of a promotional offer with another bookmaker/exchange is not termed as fraudulent practice. What you do with a third party is your private business and remains so.
@Kennythebetboy It probably sets a precedent for anyone else who was treated the same way as me on this specific offer, I'm not sure about other instances with other bookmakers.
I based my case around 1st of all me not being informed in any way about not being eligible. I said that I was effectively placing a bet on Sprinter Sacre to win by 10 lengths at evens as those were the terms stated & they were offering insurance if he won his race by less than 10 lengths. Ibas sided with me by saying "In the panel's opinion the advertised offer (which did not state clearly any restrictions) was an integral part of the betting contract between Sportingbet and their customer and obviously could have induced the customer to bet with the company rather than with another bookmaker."
I don't think this case is about whether bookies are allowed to refuse bets/enhanced offers to certain customers, it's about treating customers fairly which means communicating to them whether they qualify to be included in an offer or not.
Today has also been a triumph for Karma as following the call to Samaritans, who gratefully accepted the donation, my main bet of the day (Equitania 15.00 Lingfield 4/1) went in 5 mins later
I based my case around 1st of all me not being informed in any way about not being eligible. I said that I was effectively placing a bet on Sprinter Sacre to win by 10 lengths at evens as those were the terms stated & they were offering insurance if he won his race by less than 10 lengths. Ibas sided with me by saying "In the panel's opinion the advertised offer (which did not state clearly any restrictions) was an integral part of the betting contract between Sportingbet and their customer and obviously could have induced the customer to bet with the company rather than with another bookmaker."
I don't think this case is about whether bookies are allowed to refuse bets/enhanced offers to certain customers, it's about treating customers fairly which means communicating to them whether they qualify to be included in an offer or not.
Today has also been a triumph for Karma as following the call to Samaritans, who gratefully accepted the donation, my main bet of the day (Equitania 15.00 Lingfield 4/1) went in 5 mins later
Stoozbet, just read your blog for the first time, excellent work ....... glad to see you profited from your endeavours. Well Done !!
Like all these so called "Promotional Offers" from the Bookmaking fraternity, they are laden with small print Terms & Conditions to fox all the new subscribers they may attract. Apart from a few Booboos that were exploited by the shrewdies on here, most are not worth a light.
They use these tactics to boost their new subscriber lists, so they can boast at the AGM how they have increased their share of the market and placate the shareholders, when in most cases it is old subscribers, who have had their accounts closed and re-opened them in wives, friends & children's names to get money on.
Like all these so called "Promotional Offers" from the Bookmaking fraternity, they are laden with small print Terms & Conditions to fox all the new subscribers they may attract. Apart from a few Booboos that were exploited by the shrewdies on here, most are not worth a light.
They use these tactics to boost their new subscriber lists, so they can boast at the AGM how they have increased their share of the market and placate the shareholders, when in most cases it is old subscribers, who have had their accounts closed and re-opened them in wives, friends & children's names to get money on.
This will cost Sportingbet some possible customers, which they deserve having seen this.
2.) Sportingbet have stated that the offer was for "recreational" customers only
------------------
The game has GONE.
------------------
The game has GONE.
You dirty, filthy, rotten arber!
How dare you have the temerity to take the best price!
It's also grossly unfair that you place the occasional winning bet with this most excellent, honorable firm of bookmakers.
Hang your head in shame!
How dare you have the temerity to take the best price!
It's also grossly unfair that you place the occasional winning bet with this most excellent, honorable firm of bookmakers.
Hang your head in shame!
i opened an account with Corbetts, i had a few bets, then was given a free 20 pound bet,i tried to put it on a 5-1 horse and was told (max bet 2 pound),i rang and spoke to some retard only to be told that was correct and the max i could have on any horse was 2 pound,so had to have 10x2 pound free bets.....
MY MISSUS HAD A 200x£5 BET WITH THE BALDY ON A LAD TO WIN ANY MEDAL AT THE OLYMPICS
THIS HE DID
ON GOING TO DRAW BALDY SAID HE DIDN'T LAY THAT TYPE OF BET
IBAS DID THE BUSINESS SAYING BALDY SHOULD PAY AT 11.5/1
Media pressure and a twitter campaign won the day and in the end she got paid at the 200/1
THIS HE DID
ON GOING TO DRAW BALDY SAID HE DIDN'T LAY THAT TYPE OF BET
IBAS DID THE BUSINESS SAYING BALDY SHOULD PAY AT 11.5/1
Media pressure and a twitter campaign won the day and in the end she got paid at the 200/1
Boil exclude customers from special offers w/out warning them in a very similar way. I will now be writing claiming to be paid out in full on a BOG drifter that happened to win with them.
WD stooz for standing up to that awful firm.
WD stooz for standing up to that awful firm.
It seems to me that which ever body licenses bookmakers should be shown a copy of this thread so that they become familiar with the dubious and possibly illegal and slanderous description of what are above board practices of potential customers.
WELL DONE. 
I remember when you had the bet. Lets hope the racing post and ch4 highlight this firm.
I would write to both of them though , just incase their is a new, hungry, junior reporter who will want to highlight this case and is unafraid of loosing any freebies.
I remember when you had the bet. Lets hope the racing post and ch4 highlight this firm.
I would write to both of them though , just incase their is a new, hungry, junior reporter who will want to highlight this case and is unafraid of loosing any freebies.
Congrats and well done Stooz. bit of class with the samaritans. nice.
I do wonder sometimes how sportingbet can be so big in australia but over here they're a shambles.
I do wonder sometimes how sportingbet can be so big in australia but over here they're a shambles.
Ah,the old "recreational customer" trick.And ARBITRAGE,crime of the century!
How could IBAS legitimately find for the bookmaker in an instance where they had neglected to update their terms against the complainant? Could the small-claims court possibly have given the customer less? No way.
It's just a fig-leaf, if IBAS can find for the bookmaker, they will. Don't use them.
It's just a fig-leaf, if IBAS can find for the bookmaker, they will. Don't use them.
Wonder if the OP can still get a bet on with sportingbet after his case went against them.
Cheers guys, nice to resurrect this thread.
In answer to your question Barrowboy the account did bite the dust after this sorry episode.
In answer to your question Barrowboy the account did bite the dust after this sorry episode.
Very well done stoozbet. A man after my own heart, IT PAYS TO COMPLAIN. Now sue the bastids for having the temerity to even suggest fraud.
Brilliant result and they were quite wrong to use a rule that you were not notified of and nor did they not accept your bet on that same basis.
stoozbet
Not 1000 percent sure but think over the years i have had 100 or so accounts with them.
WELL DONE AND KEEP GOING.
Not 1000 percent sure but think over the years i have had 100 or so accounts with them.
WELL DONE AND KEEP GOING.
Probably the main reason you won was because it was more a dispute that could have been handled by the Advertising Standards Authority rather than one over a dispute regarding the finer detail of a bet if say a wrong named horse was written on a slip such as Hello There if there were also runners that day called Hello All and Almost There, or if the time and meeting were wrong but it could only really have been under one set of circumstances, such as if you had written the wrong meeting on a placepot slip at a time when it was the only meeting not to have started.
I also really don't see a bookies's problem even if punters are arbitraging, as regardless of that they are either going to win or lose with any bookie anyway, so if I were to bet with Sportingbet and lay on Betfair and lost on here but won on Sportingbet to still make an overall profit then that has fcuk all to do with them. Just as it doesn't if I win on here and lose on Sportingbet and if that happened and I was to "come clean" and admit I was arbing and asked for my losing stake money back from Sportingbet, are they really going to oblige and hand it over?
I also really don't see a bookies's problem even if punters are arbitraging, as regardless of that they are either going to win or lose with any bookie anyway, so if I were to bet with Sportingbet and lay on Betfair and lost on here but won on Sportingbet to still make an overall profit then that has fcuk all to do with them. Just as it doesn't if I win on here and lose on Sportingbet and if that happened and I was to "come clean" and admit I was arbing and asked for my losing stake money back from Sportingbet, are they really going to oblige and hand it over?
Out of interest was the sprinter sacre price arbable at all on here? I doubt it.
cant believe they tried to knock you on that bet (or maybe i can). well done for getting weighed in
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539