There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 110 comments are related to the topic:
A question for you all re. Betfred
A question for you all re. Betfred
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 110
|
By:
The way I look at this (trying to be impartial), is that if the bet was placed as advertised, 1 from each section, he would get enhanced odds 5 fold. What is now happening with the 6 selection at enhanced odds, is actually a single bet (the total amount paid as part of the 5 team acca) at an enhanced price. This should not be allowed.
I would say that settling the 6th selection at the normal odds (not enhanced) is fair. |
|
By:
it all hinges on the enhanced odds and whether in t&c's it states no more than 1 per section unless selecting 2 from each section, if it doesn't a judge would probably rule the receipt a valid contract. If it is buried in the rules then its a 6 fold or halve the stake for 2 x 5folds. Seems fair to me but obviously that firm isn't a fair one with a huge amount of previous to prove it.
|
|
By:
2 x 5 folds seems a decent solution
|
|
By:
I don't know why software cant pick up a void or incorrect bet at time of placing a bet.
The lottery terminal tells punters if they have too many or too few selections. |
|
By:
If I were settling the bet, I would pay the customer either the fivefold with bonus or sixfold without bonus - whichever was more.
|
|
By:
giggitygiggity 16 Apr 15 09:20 Joined: 03 Jul 11 | Topic/replies: 825 | Blogger: giggitygiggity's blog
Dixie if you are going in there try to put that bet on... Fill in one per section except for one section where you put two. You will see that the automated system will not let the cashier put the bet on Been to Fred's. Manager wasn't there just a cashier who started Cheltenham week. In my last dealing with this guy, he managed to translate £50 on a 9/4, as 50p win paying £1.12. I placed 2 bets, one with 2 selections in the skinniest price range & one with 2 selections in the highest price range. The automated system accepted both bets. |
|
By:
Think you are wasting your time with this bet Paul. Roida sums it up perfectly. A £1000 difference suggests the punter is no 'two bob merchant'. Reckon he's trying to work this one.
|
|
By:
Paul you're wasting your time - sad to say the bookie is 100% right in this case
|
|
By:
So the consensus on here seems to be that he is not entitled to the returns clearly printed on his receipt as calculated by Betfred's computer system.
Would any any legal experts care to voice an opinion on the chances of a court enforcing the contract? |
|
By:
Morally he should be paid but you do not need to be a legal expert to be pointed towards the bet saying ONE result from each section, as this has not been adhered to I doubt any court action could produce a favorable result for the punter.
|
|
By:
So the consensus on here seems to be that he is not entitled to the returns clearly printed on his receipt as calculated by Betfred's computer system.
Would any any legal experts care to voice an opinion on the chances of a court enforcing the contract? Paul I don't want to come across as pedantic ; but does his receipt say" your returns will be X" or " your returns could be X"? |
|
By:
i personally think it's irrelevant what his receipt says as the offer of enhanced prices seems to be as far as i can see one from each section, giving a five fold. as he has six selections its outwith the t's and c's.
|
|
By:
the 5 selections from box A thru to Box E should be paid at ENHANCED odds.
the sixth selection from box A should be paid at normal odds (not enhanced). therefore, the six timer should be paid out as above. IMHO, the qualification has been met for selections 1 to 5. |
|
By:
The slip states:
"Bet returns" followed by the amount they are now declining to pay out. |
|
By:
BB how do you know what one in section A to pay at enhanced odds and what would have happened if one of the selections in A had lost?
|
|
By:
there is nothing stopping the punter from putting his enhanced 5 timer winnings (1 from each box) on a sixth selection (say a Monday night game) at "normal" odds after he has collected, so it shouldn't make a jot of difference anyway
|
|
By:
yes but if one had lost are you saying they should pay enhanced on the remaining five, cause surely that would be a massive loophole
|
|
By:
There is, because he wouldn't get on after copping a fivefold at enhanced odds the bet before...
 |
|
By:
all selections revert to the inferior Long List prices
i would agree with baldy . it's "similar" to a shop going buy 1 can of bean for 50p and being told that if you buy 2 get one free and the customer asking to buy one at the average price of the 3 , 33p |
|
By:
by the way no lover of the firm but imo this time they are right
|
|
By:
BB how do you know what one in section A to pay at enhanced odds and what would have happened if one of the selections in A had lost?
Fair comment. As with all discrepancies on bets, first named selection (in running order) would count for bonus purposes. |
|
By:
#my grammer is terrible
|
|
By:
grammar
ffs  |
|
By:
If one had lost the dealer he would have lost, he did a 6 horse acca and hence needs all six to win. What BB and myself are saying is that he should get a 5 horse acca at enhanced odds (as offered) but the other selection at normal odds.
Assuming the %age enhancement of prices in category A is consistent. It doesnt really matter which selection they settle at enhanced or name prices. |
|
By:
vitally important to get the bet and prices clarified before going thru the machine.
Baldy worker should have spotted the error and said you need an equal amount in each box. Machine should have refused the bet, etc, etc, where do you draw the line though ? |
|
By:
i cant see the returns on the slip angle being an arguement either. simple example customer places a football bet and later on one or more of his games is postponed, his returns wont be the same as his slip obviously. maybe they need to look at the wording and the training of their staff but for the money on offer to them you aint exactly going to get the best.
|
|
By:
Thinking about it if the bet was placed on a proper sections coupon & the punter has two selections in the first section then this is a permed bet
2x1x1x1x1 so if his stake was say £100 then this becomes two £50 enhanced 5 folds. If this adds up to more than they were willing to originally pay out you could go down that route. |
|
By:
T&c s the saviour of so many companies.
|
|
By:
The coupon reads as follows;
SECTIONS LIST Select 1 or more from each section ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Minimum odds of 1 from each section - 15/1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- the matches are then listed in sections ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 from each section (tickbox) 2 or more from each section (tickbox) IMO if the punter has ticked the 1 from each section tickbox, then he has a valid bet. If he has ticked the 2 or more from each section tickbox, then he should be settled at long list prices. |
|
By:
you can't take any chances with Baldfred, they will welch on anything, punter to blame really as didn't follow coupon instructions.
common sense should prevail on Baldfreds part to pay 5 at enhanced at 1 at normal price. |
|
By:
common sense should prevail on Baldfreds part to pay 5 at enhanced at 1 at normal price.
fairest outcome imo |
|
By:
Thinking about it if the bet was placed on a proper sections coupon & the punter has two selections in the first section then this is a permed bet
2x1x1x1x1 so if his stake was say £100 then this becomes two £50 enhanced 5 folds. If this adds up to more than they were willing to originally pay out you could go down that route. If one of his bankers lost then he could still claim the other 1/2 stake 5fold. He did a 6fold acc all of which must win. The wording of the returns does not matter as the dealel pointed out. how abou settling it thus; From the bottom up at enhanced odds on last 4 sections and a regular odds double on the 2 in the first section? |
|
By:
Cannot believe Big Boss blaming staff. Cashier is probably taking 400 bets and would be there till midnight if she scrutinised every bet.
The onus is always on the punter to fill out the slip correctly. |
|
By:
if he's ticked the 1 from each section,
can't see how he's got a valid bet,hes got 2 teams in one section,making 6 not 5. |
|
By:
He has got a valid bet penzance has they have already agreed to pay him out a 6 team acca at normal odds.
|
|
By:
At the bottom of the coupon, it states;
SECTIONS LIST - If the minimum number of selections are not met the remaining selections will be settled using Long List prices. Permutation bets are not allowed on the Sections List. |
|
By:
that's what I'm saying m8,not the enhanced
odds. |
|
By:
Cannot believe Big Boss blaming staff. Cashier is probably taking 400 bets and would be there till midnight if she scrutinised every bet.
you can never have frequented Baldys, the likelihood of any staff member being deluged with bets is nigh on zero. one glance at the coupon would take 2 seconds to spot six crosses instead of five, on the proviso that the worker actually cared (highly unlikely). |
|
By:
Well if you're going to blame the cashier, you may just as well lay the blame on the punter for writing the bet out wrong....
|
|
By:
No Big Boss i dont frequent Baldys. Wrote out £50 @ 7/1 some nag about 8 yrs ago. Took about 15 mins to get the bet authorised.
 |