There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
opened an account with bet bright at 12pm today. Had £300 on Jers Girl @7/2 in 12.20. Tried to bet on next and couldnt. Customer services advised me that the traders had closed my account to sports bets. After one bet? Most ridiculous thing I have ever come across, has anyone else come across something like this? Hope I get my withdrawal from them.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 54
|
By:
It doesn't surprise me. But it is still ridiculous.
|
|
By:
Irish Maiden Hurdle
Large Stake Wins by a mile Bet SP What the hell do yo expect FFS |
|
By:
Irish Maiden Hurdle
Large Stake Wins by a mile Beat SP What the hell do yo expect FFS |
|
By:
Great bet btw! And very standard practice this. Looks like inside info, why would they take a bet! It is a shame that the GC can't enforce bookies to take betsa for a wee while longer!
|
|
By:
He hasn't beaten SP by a massive margin. Could understand it a bit more if he had got on at 7/1 or 6/1.
They can't know whether the OP was informed, shrewd or lucky. But it is pathetic that an account can be closed after one bet. Sky bet effectively did the same thing to me when I had a monkey each way on a 9-2 winner. |
|
By:
sorry it was 100/30 actually, still I see your point. Also had a couple of blackjack bets in the meantime, so they could see I was a bit of a gambler. Sorry state of affairs. These sites just want to take money from people who cant afford it and have their small bets on horses and footie, with no risk. Very wrong.
|
|
By:
RUK sent me an email offering a £30 free bet with this firm. Unfortunately I don't offer bookmakers my custom.
Perhaps you could complain to RUK for supporting them. |
|
By:
All bookmakers need to be enforced to take more bets from winning punters o/w it makes the whole industry farcical.
|
|
By:
They checked your MO with traders shared list of non profitable customers. It is now the norm in the industry. Even if somebody decides to blow the whistle it will continue and apart from disgust on the social media platforms nothing will happen.
|
|
By:
Single bet with substantial stake. Beats SP. Wins. Account closed.
Nothing unusual I'm afraid, even if it should be. |
|
By:
That's quite a decent stake for a poor maiden hurdle though so I can see why
|
|
By:
How much do connections of these horses get on without any problems,surely £300 stake in any race is buttons when you're paying about £20,000 per year to keep them in training.
|
|
By:
yep same old , lets just hear from sp betting account closures . far more interesting
|
|
By:
Closed after one bet? To last that long is quite good!
|
|
By:
Quantize that's stupid talk so they should take bets in better graded races same old story yes but still appalling
|
|
By:
@rayman -- They checked your MO with traders shared list of non profitable customers. It is now the norm in the industry.
That would probably be illegal. Is there any evidence for it? Another possibility is that OP -- knowingly or unwittingly -- was part of a wave of business for this horse, if several people opened accounts on the same day to back the same horse to the same stake. |
|
By:
Youve done the easy bit. No try getting your money
 |
|
By:
Ramruna there is a list of punters that are non profitable and if you printed it out there would not be enough paper in the World...
The worm will turn though and "terms and conditions" will soon not be enough to protect the "alleged" bookmakers from the new mis-selling scandal.. The Banks have taken their fair share of prosecutions and the "bookmakers" will be next. If you turn up (I was going to say work ) at one of the "major firms" and have been involved in closing down accounts prepare to be prosecuted and be prepared to go to gaol.The fact that the swapping of information is illegal seems to have passed them by.I have kept all my emails and am looking forward to the day.. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
@homefortea -- if the account was closed after one bet because the punter is on a list, why was the account allowed to be opened in the first place? I yield to no man in my distaste for bookies' business practices but in this case is it not more likely that it is what it looks like: the winning £500 bet was the trigger? Perhaps because of its correlation with other bets on the same horse.
|
|
By:
Ramruma-There will be no 'List' just a network of traders talking to each other. There will be a management supervisor monitoring traders who make the right and wrong decisions probably with an incentive scheme. Im sure there will be a mugs 'List' also with freebie incentives. I remember being a new customer with ToteCredit many years ago. I was invited to a private box for a good lunch at the races. Talking to my fellow selective guests they all had one thing in common that is they bet heavily and frequently. The host offered to give us personal service and similar treats some owned horses. After several successful bets. I was referred to traders and started to be restricted. Then I started to get discrepancies on my statements. All a ploy to make me go away. In the end I had my account closed. This was a time when no online betting was available. It is so easy to identify non profitable customers now.
|
|
By:
Ramruna you get one chance to get a bet on when you open an account if you want to make a statement...
I was there at the beginning and we asked for ID (faxed !) but would take the bets first... I know that there is a database of successful punters that is being traded but if you have a family member you can make a quick strike before being added to it... |
|
By:
There will be no 'List' just a network of traders talking to each other. There will be a management supervisor monitoring traders who make the right and wrong decisions probably with an incentive scheme.
Agreed. There's too much at stake for them to not share the information. I opened an account recently and was on £5 win with 0 bets on the account. How would they know unless they'd been given advanced notice? |
|
By:
"There will be a management supervisor monitoring traders who make the right and wrong decisions probably with an incentive scheme."
Not sure if the Bantam has a clue.. |
|
By:
Does the firm have iesnare or similar device tracking software? Did you click through an affiliate to place the bet? Was the bet placed using a machine, bank account, name or address that you have had winning accounts operating from?
|
|
By:
That would suggest that a list is the least of our problems..
I have a floating ip address frog2.. Everytime that I used a new identity I bought a new computer (etc) specifically to use for only that name... |
|
By:
Are you using the same router or any other equipment in your network?
|
|
By:
New router every time..
No other equipment that I know of.. |
|
By:
A completely clean digital finger print stands out like a sore thumb. As do machines that try to stop the super cookies reporting back to base.
|
|
By:
So you cannot bet if you have one and cannot bet if you have not got one...
So the answer is an INTERNET CAFE...  |
|
By:
Our only hope is that the EU or government takes note of the finger printing practices and makes it illegal. The home secretary said the other day that security services would not be allowed to routinely access browser history. But surely she realises that firms like the advertising networks already track and store the majority of what we do through digital finger printing.
|
|
By:
Best answer is a used smart phone.
|
|
By:
But surely they could track the original user...
|
|
By:
Yes the device will be tracked by iovation (iesnare) and rated. If one of the bookie firms has blacklisted that device then unfortunately all the other firms will know about it. No problem with data protection etc as it is only the device not the person that has had information shared on.
The situation, as I see it, is as follows: 1. Punter backs a few winners, beats SP, might be an arber, comes to the site from oddschecker, tries to get a sign up bonus or whatever. 2. Bookie A closes the account. He does not want that person back so he blacklists the device so he knows in future not to accept new accounts from that device. 3. Bookie B gets an account signed up. Takes a bet or two. Checks the iovation score and says no thanks because the device is blacklisted. Is this information sharing? Is this legal? It is the device not the person that has been scored. It would be obvious what was going on if accounts were not allowed to be set up. Far easier to restrict things after a couple of bets. |
|
By:
frog2 the whole arber thing is a whitewash unless you live in Malawi and the alleged "bookmakers" have been blowing that trumpet since before Roy Castle got his first musical instrument...
However it seems to me that the fact is that information is being shared and that cannot be right... There has to be a way to get these chancers prosecuted... |
|
By:
It is the device not the person. Is that legal?
|
|
By:
Cheers will work on that..
|
|
By:
If you access same account for anything in the system from two different devices then those devices will be linked.
|
|
By:
"Account restrictions/closures will be revisited, at length. E-mail address is: BettingForum@britishhorseracing.com" - https://twitter.com/HbfBritain/status/664547793684467712
|