There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Those bookies who either restrict or close their accounts , I was wondering if those people would be willing to take them on in the courts . Maybe set up a panel of people who would represent them in their action . If enough punters feel strongly enough about their treatment from bookies surely the way to go is through the courts and apply to have their licence revoked . The costs could be met be those punters who have this problem , if what I'm reading lately surely there will be enough of them to contribute .
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 64
|
By:
reading is true..
|
|
By:
Workrider
I totally understand the frustration although i don't have any accounts (except here) but what court action could be taken anyway, they don't have to accept bets. Bad publicity yes, but they get that now. |
|
By:
So they can do what they want with impunity Andrew ,you are probably right maybe no point taking them on..
|
|
By:
I think the only constructive action would be for everyone to take a stand and not use them at all (only exchanges) but this is not going to happen of course.
|
|
By:
A licenced Taxi driver for example is not allowed to offer fares to some people but not others without good reason.So the licence should state that everyone should be treated fairly or no licence.
|
|
By:
I am not a lawyer so am assuming this doesn't hold up but the equality act 2010 prohibits companies from restricting services to anyone in the 9 protected groups such as disability etc?
|
|
By:
Status of a bet as a contract
When you place a bet with a licensed gambling business, you enter into a legally enforceable contract with that business. The gambling business must make the terms and conditions of the bet available to you. You should make sure that you are familiar with the terms and conditions and that you understand what they might mean, especially in the event of any changed circumstances around the bet, before you decide whether to place the bet. We also require gambling businesses to provide a means for you to complain about the bet. This helps us to keep betting fair. Gambling businesses can refuse your bet Just as you can decide whether or not you wish to place a bet, a gambling business is also free to decide who they accept bets from, and on what terms, in order to manage their business as they see fit. Because a bet has to be a commercial arrangement between two willing parties, there is no statutory right to bet that means that a gambling business must accept your bet. Just like any other commercial business, a gambling business may sometimes withdraw offers or refuse bets in order to reduce risks to their business. Making a complaint When you have placed your bet, your contract with the gambling business means that you have certain rights and the contract can be enforced in law. This means that you have a right to take a gambling transaction to court if you do not think the outcome meets the terms and conditions of the contract. Gambling businesses must offer a complaints procedure, including access to an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provider free to the consumer, which you should follow before deciding whether to take a matter to the courts. https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/for-the-public/Your-rights/Status-of-a-bet-as-a-contract.aspx |
|
By:
"This helps us to keep betting fair." after the first para - why not "This helps them to keep betting unfair." after next one?
|
|
By:
The Horserace Bettors Forum - have been tackling this problem - on and OFF - for the past 5 years ..... Haven't they ?
|
|
By:
Also I love the way that the UKGC gives licenses to businesses all over the world and glibly says "you have a right to take a gambling transaction to court".
|
|
By:
You are 100% correct leif.But could the gambling commission make taking a bet with a take out similar to Australia as a condition of the licence?Local authoritys are able to put conditions on Taxi drivers licences.
|
|
By:
It's always good to remember that something's importance to you doesn't reflect its actual importance. Ultimately, wider society couldn't care less about your sense of outrage, courts typically require laws to have been broken to take any action and don't take kindly to spurious legal action.
|
|
By:
Restricted accounts probably represent if lucky, maybe 1% of their business. They will argue that the other 99% get on whatever they want.
Good luck but I can't see it changing, |
|
By:
a gambling business is also free to decide who they accept bets from, and on what terms, in order to manage their business as they see fit.
Those few words suggest they can decide to offer you £10 or 10p? I can see it getting worse rather than better  |
|
By:
the dealer • February 21, 2021 1:46 PM GMT
Restricted accounts probably represent if lucky, maybe 1% of their business I'd be very surprised if that was correct. |
|
By:
There would need to be a Conveyor Belt of New Mugs - joining Daily - IF, "99% get on whatever they want."
|
|
By:
The primary drivers for restriction are whether or not the customer looks for best prices, plays casino games, and does silly accas. If you stick to horses and only bet when the firms prices are competitive, you are 100% going to be restricted and banned from BOG and offers. If that is only 1% fair enough but I'd be astonished if it was.
|
|
By:
Some here could get together and employ a brief to detail cases and circumstances to the Gambling Commission the reluctance or refusal of bookies accepting bets from recreational punters esp those not playing/gambling on online slots and casino games ie a wilful and deliberate discrimination by bookies on types of gambling activities by customers/punters which (could) be a contradiction of the Betting/Gaming licence Act.
If so, count me in and contribution to a Paypal account opened for this purpose. |
|
By:
only we as a collective could bring about a change by not betting with them or starting with not betting with one particular company,could be any company to just make a point but we are not a collective,sadly
|
|
By:
Even Tony Calvin's column makes me chuckle when he puts up tips based on sportsbook prices. Under normal circumstances he wouldn't be able to get more than 50p on with them given his column shows a good winning record and regularly beats SP - both things meaning severe restrictions are a certainty.
|
|
By:
I am sure that more could be done but not sure that the courts are the answer.
If most of the restricted punters were younger then I am sure a very strong social media campaign would get the bookies to change their terms but in general most youngsters don't bet on horse racing and I would guess most restricted customers are probably >45. If a shop was selling a product for £100 but wouldn't let everyone buy at that price, there would be a national outcry but "gambling" is seen as an illness or a sin and consequently no-one is interested. I believe the only way is lobbying the government and gambling commission with the aim of a bookie having to accept a bet to a set minimum liability. Restricting accounts for taking the price because they are offering the best price is really an unacceptable practice. |
|
By:
Jackie Weaver to head the panel
|
|
By:
The only "steady stream of mugs" are those on Foxy bingo and the vast array of slots that come with 'offers' and promotions.
Traditional forms of gambling are dying on their ar&e. Last thing the books need is a smart punter eating into an already dwindling profit margin. 7,681 Total number of betting shops in Great Britain (March 2020) (7.7% decrease from March 2019) £2.4bn Total GGY for non-remote betting (including machines) (Apr 2019 – Mar 2020) (26.4% decrease from Apr 2018 – Mar 2019) £1.0bn Total GGY for non-remote casino (including machines) (Apr 2019 – Mar 2020) (4.0% decrease from Apr 2018 – Mar 2019) £5.7bn Total GGY for Remote Betting, Bingo & Casino Sector (Apr 2019 – Mar 2020) (8.1% increase from Apr 2018 – Mar 2019) |
|
By:
You could have taken a recent opportunity to help reduce the amount of (effectively) free money that the books are coining in from casino & slot games - and therefore taken a small step towards getting some of their focus back onto bookmaking!
While they can take as much (effectively) risk free money as they like from people addicted to playing games where they cannot win (long term) - why would they want to engage or do battle with people that might win? But the (short sighted) majority on here seemed to think regulating slots & casinos would be bad for them! - there's none so blind as those that cannot see. |
|
By:
slots and casinos are regulated
|
|
By:
Sorry (blind & pedantic)) Dave - I meant properly and effectively regulated!
|
|
By:
When I see the amounts of money in bets matched in here, I find it difficult to believe that you guys are not able to get [your] bets on.
As for the bookies, Serious punters? Who needs 'em? Mugs only need apply. TIA. |
|
By:
^^ this thread is about bookmakers not being "properly and effectively regulated" regarding horse racing. Why don't you stick to the subject instead going off on an absurd tangent.
|
|
By:
if there were a class action i'd contribute £500 towards costs
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
If there was any grounds for action, it would be against the UKGC for failing to ensure that gambling "is conducted in a fair and open manner" as required by law.
|
|
By:
takeing them to court could be hard,imo.
It's just like the local corner shop refusing to serve someone or a landlord of a pub barring a drunk.Can't see how they would be made to take bets off someone if they don't want to.Freedom of choice. |
|
By:
Dave - if you can't see the connection - you are beyond help.
If you had two strands to your business - which one would put most of your focus and investment into? - the strand that gives you a sack load of risk free money every single day - or the other bit?  |
|
By:
ericster when someone puts ^^ in a post it means they are responding to the second above post (or second below depending on set up).
|
|
By:
^^still banging the drum that no one is ever going to hear.
|
|
By:
It beats moaning that your account has been restricted - but then siding with the people that restricted your account when it looks like some of their more insidious practices might get restricted.
I love that you still can't see the connection between them discovering free money elsewhere and restricting accounts. |
|
By:
There is an article by Lee Mottershead in the post today about bookies not being able to restrict is Aus. If someone could post it please? Thanks
|
|
By:
@ericster I am not a pro punter backing hundreds per race. I like £25 to £50 e/w generally on horses over 14/1 in the big handicaps. I also like to place £5 e/w trixies. If I have a win only bet on a shorter one, then it is on here.
Yesterday was a prime example in that Guard Your Dreams was paying 1-7 with Slybet (restricted to 0) and SB (ok for now). I had £50 e/w at 22/1 and would have lost on here and with most other books paying 1-5. PP were 1-6 but why take same the same price for a place less? I surely epitomise a classic recreational punter and yet many books won't take my bets just because either I have won or taken the best prices that they were offering. I have had a few e/w trixies up that paid 5 figures and cashed out of one that would have paid £38k on Bet3p for 11.5K before the last leg. (which was unplaced). Over 40 years I am not doubt a big loser but have probably recouped a fair amount over the last 15 odd years. If they cannot take my bets which are purely based on form and experience then they really should not be able to hold a licence. I could explicity prove no inside knowledge from any source whatsoever. |
|
By:
The Management21 Feb 21 16:00Joined: 27 Dec 00 | Topic/replies: 4,585 | Blogger: The Management's blog
It beats moaning that your account has been restricted - but then siding with the people that restricted your account when it looks like some of their more insidious practices might get restricted.BlushLaugh I love that you still can't see the connection between them discovering free money elsewhere and restricting accounts. Spot on. The availability of guaranteed risk free income from casinos, slots etc has turned the "bookmakers" heads. No need to worry about traditional bookmaking and bookmaking techniques. Easier to just isolate all those who show ANY discipline or skill in their punting and limit them to nothing or peanuts. Not sure tbh if they have wherewithal to revert.... |