|
By:
Can't deposit. Everyone scared to withdraw. Gets bigger limit if u get a payrise
|
|
By:
How is their behavour that encourages punters to keep money, including money that you may well need locked up in a betting account conducive with responsible gambling.
|
|
By:
"Costs at least £200 to keep 4k in betfair for a year."
4k annual profit is average 2k for a year is £100 before tax at best rates is £60 after tax (unless you have bugger all income otherwise). So all that buggering around for the price of a Pizza Express dinner for two? |
|
By:
Agree, you should send a Data Subject Access Request = modern day equivalent of gluing the locks if you make it very specific and detailed.
|
|
By:
I will do something about it like you suggest but not spoiling my bank holiday. Might even set up a group like the post office scandal and get thousands back for all the past wrong doings the bookmakers have done!!!
Must be people out there who would get thousands if something like the PPI claim with banks had to pay out. |
|
By:
there are these new fangled things called ISAs, longbridge. not getting the maths either, 4k average balance over a year @5% is 200. there are relatively easy ways to top that, eg 7% edge saver, 7 % FD RS et al. the overriding key point anyway is I'd rather be getting protection from inflation for my cash assets, rather than it supplementing bookie coffers.
|
|
By:
i agree with cider, it didn't matter a couple of years ago, but it is clearly in gambling companies interest now to encourage people to leave large balances and by selecting people for checks on a crude measure of deposits, ignoring anything other than very short term withdrawals.
|
|
By:
Cider - he didn't say 4k balance, he said 4k winnings per year - so average balance 2k.
ISA a good shout if you haven't already maxed it out. |
|
By:
I was using a general figure, not pertaining to lc specifically. I suppose most people have a float they consistently draw down to (or deposit up to!), but depends on their MO, backers/layers etc, layers may need a bigger float. I feel like this is missing the overall point that it only benefits bookmakers to leave unnecessary cash deposits in accounts (at a cost to the individual). My inclination is not to give my money away, whether that be £3, £30 or £3000.
|
|
By:
All of that maybe true, and the criticism of bookies legitimate but it comes down to the question of whether £200 interest is worth no longer using your account which is the outcome above.
It’s also known as cutting your nose off to spite your face, you might save 200 but forego potential 4K in profit. |
|
By:
Even if you are manipulated into holding larger balances, is that guaranteed to keep the account free from further intervention? That's rhetorical obviously, nobody knows. Just another variable in this sh1tshow.
|
|
By:
Dave might find this too conspiratorial, but you current accounts used to give a return on deposits….now they not only don’t give one even in high interest environments, they actually charge a fee for owning an account used to pay bills.
The interest vanished and along came incentives given from clearing houses in the form of ‘cash back’ which ofc is the clipping of coins through the forced use of electronic payments. I don’t know the answer to this, but it wouldn’t surprise me to find gambling transactions to be classed as cash advances by the very same people, and therefore not free. |
|
By:
but it wouldn’t surprise me to find gambling transactions to be classed as cash advances by the very same people, and therefore not free.
Not sure what point you are making. Internet gambling purchases were classed as cash advances on credit cards for quite some time before being banned. Don't know what the processing fee is on debit card deposits, but given the higher than average possibility of fraud and charge backs, I imagine it would be higher than eg groceries at sainsbury's. |
|
By:
The credit card payments were tightened years ago and banks still processed debit payments without hassle.
That seems to have changed recently going by anecdotal evidence provided on this forum where banks take exception with the latter, perhaps part of regulation. And as we always see, societal habits are shaped by the implementation of charges/fees/taxes and or fines. It could therefore be that debit transactions have implied costs now too. |
|
By:
I think the "anecdotes" are almost all related to anti-money laundering procedures rather than anti-gambling.
|
|
By:
(Of course actual money launderers are rarely inconvenienced by these procedures)
|