Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
22 Apr 25
20:09
Joined:
Date Joined:
22 Oct 02
Ladbrokes have stated their decision to withhold payment on a winning bet worth six figures placed by a stable lad last year is "entirely consistent" with their terms due to an ongoing investigation by the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board (IHRB).
Stable lad Dylan Phelan placed a €30 each-way double on Rocky's Diamond in a maiden hurdle at Limerick and Diamond Nora in a mares' maiden hurdle at Ballinrobe on April 19, 2024, taking prices of 80-1 and 125-1. Both won at starting prices of 22-1 and 16-1, resulting in a potentially life-changing payout of €319,440 for Phelan, who works for the trainer of both horses, Declan Queally, at his Waterford stable. However, Ladbrokes have declined to settle the bet on the basis that both races were under investigation by the IHRB after the raceday stewards at Limerick and Ballinrobe inquired as to the apparent improvement in form shown by the winners and referred the matter on to an IHRB referrals committee.
In a statement on Tuesday, the IHRB confirmed that "winner all right was given on the day following both races" and that the investigation "is now nearing its conclusion and a decision will be taken shortly as to what further action, if any, will be taken". It also confirmed Phelan was not the subject of said investigation.
According to a letter sent in June by Ladbrokes to Phelan, a copy of which has been seen by the Racing Post, an attempt was made on April 22 to collect the bet, which the letter said was due to pay €100,000, the maximum daily payout limit for a wager placed over the counter in a betting shop for the type of races Rocky's Diamond and Diamond Nora won. However, Phelan was blocked from redeeming the bet and has not been paid out. Describing his frustration over the past year, he said: "It's been some emotional rollercoaster. Some good days thinking about it, but mainly bad and plenty of sleepless nights. "It's tough on the head and not easy, it's a fair burden to be honest. I had a few small bets on the same horses, nothing crazy, with other bookmakers and I got paid out."
He described the rationale behind both bets, noting that the Queally stable was out of form when the two horses finished down the field on the same Gowran card five beforehand in a month where the stable had one winner from 17 runners and none placed. "We had been disappointed with a couple of horses at the time and we hadn't many winners," he said. "Diamond Nora won a point-to-point at Ballindenisk that January and had been disappointing afterwards, but I thought she turned a corner. Rocky's Diamond ran a lovely race beforehand at Gowran when he was only a baby and I just thought he was improving and looked better going to Limerick. "I know he's turned into a very good horse, but no-one knew that was going to happen, he exceeded all expectations. I took a chance and it worked out, that's it. "There's market movers the whole time and they moved a little bit, but Declan's horses have a big following and plenty could have latched on. "At the end of the day I placed a couple of bets and I got lucky, that's the bottom line." 'My head is fried'
The saga could be set to roll on, irrespective of the findings of the IHRB investigation, as Phelan said: "We’ve launched High Court proceedings but we’re waiting on a date. I can't put into words how frustrating it has been. It's going on too long and my head is just fried with it." In a response provided to the Racing Post, Ladbrokes said they take integrity matters "extremely seriously" and that the approach taken is consistent with the bookmaker's terms and conditions. "The IHRB is conducting an ongoing investigation into these races and we are awaiting the outcome before settling bets related to this investigation," said a statement from the firm. "When a sporting governing body is investigating the integrity of a sports event on which we have taken notable bets, we will await the outcome of those proceedings before settling bets relating to the matter under investigation. "We take integrity matters in sport extremely seriously and our approach is entirely consistent with our terms and conditions and how we would approach any sports event under investigation."
HAPPY TO TAKE THE BETS AND THEN WELCH WHEN IT COMES TO PAYING OUT...
Stable lad Dylan Phelan placed a €30 each-way double on Rocky's Diamond in a maiden hurdle at Limerick and Diamond Nora in a mares' maiden hurdle at Ballinrobe on April 19, 2024, taking prices of 80-1 and 125-1. Both won at starting prices of 22-1 and 16-1, resulting in a potentially life-changing payout of €319,440 for Phelan, who works for the trainer of both horses, Declan Queally, at his Waterford stable. However, Ladbrokes have declined to settle the bet on the basis that both races were under investigation by the IHRB after the raceday stewards at Limerick and Ballinrobe inquired as to the apparent improvement in form shown by the winners and referred the matter on to an IHRB referrals committee.
In a statement on Tuesday, the IHRB confirmed that "winner all right was given on the day following both races" and that the investigation "is now nearing its conclusion and a decision will be taken shortly as to what further action, if any, will be taken". It also confirmed Phelan was not the subject of said investigation.
According to a letter sent in June by Ladbrokes to Phelan, a copy of which has been seen by the Racing Post, an attempt was made on April 22 to collect the bet, which the letter said was due to pay €100,000, the maximum daily payout limit for a wager placed over the counter in a betting shop for the type of races Rocky's Diamond and Diamond Nora won. However, Phelan was blocked from redeeming the bet and has not been paid out. Describing his frustration over the past year, he said: "It's been some emotional rollercoaster. Some good days thinking about it, but mainly bad and plenty of sleepless nights. "It's tough on the head and not easy, it's a fair burden to be honest. I had a few small bets on the same horses, nothing crazy, with other bookmakers and I got paid out."
He described the rationale behind both bets, noting that the Queally stable was out of form when the two horses finished down the field on the same Gowran card five beforehand in a month where the stable had one winner from 17 runners and none placed. "We had been disappointed with a couple of horses at the time and we hadn't many winners," he said. "Diamond Nora won a point-to-point at Ballindenisk that January and had been disappointing afterwards, but I thought she turned a corner. Rocky's Diamond ran a lovely race beforehand at Gowran when he was only a baby and I just thought he was improving and looked better going to Limerick. "I know he's turned into a very good horse, but no-one knew that was going to happen, he exceeded all expectations. I took a chance and it worked out, that's it. "There's market movers the whole time and they moved a little bit, but Declan's horses have a big following and plenty could have latched on. "At the end of the day I placed a couple of bets and I got lucky, that's the bottom line." 'My head is fried'
The saga could be set to roll on, irrespective of the findings of the IHRB investigation, as Phelan said: "We’ve launched High Court proceedings but we’re waiting on a date. I can't put into words how frustrating it has been. It's going on too long and my head is just fried with it." In a response provided to the Racing Post, Ladbrokes said they take integrity matters "extremely seriously" and that the approach taken is consistent with the bookmaker's terms and conditions. "The IHRB is conducting an ongoing investigation into these races and we are awaiting the outcome before settling bets related to this investigation," said a statement from the firm. "When a sporting governing body is investigating the integrity of a sports event on which we have taken notable bets, we will await the outcome of those proceedings before settling bets relating to the matter under investigation. "We take integrity matters in sport extremely seriously and our approach is entirely consistent with our terms and conditions and how we would approach any sports event under investigation."
HAPPY TO TAKE THE BETS AND THEN WELCH WHEN IT COMES TO PAYING OUT...
Show More
I've stopped betting with them. Their antepost bets view is restricted to a mere 2-month period only at a time eg one can only view bet selections from 1st Jan -> 1st Mar or 1st Mar -> 1st May but not 1st Jan -> 1st May which is very annoying, unfriendly and unnecessary.
I just wish more people would actually start refusing to bet with them
was in a couple of their shops last week and i was the only person in there. during racing.
was in a couple of their shops last week and i was the only person in there. during racing.
hulk, I guess the youngsters get a quicker fix/better return on their cash doing the FOBTs which they can do 9am til 9pm. The bookies will be paying even less for the pictures in the next deal.
The biggest issue here is the 100k limit.that is low for a normal race day,they’ve lost can’t promote Irish racing but then make out it’s low grade.
Theses guys who struck the bet,knew what they were doing,found a weak spot and targeted it..
It was an on course shop,no cameras,no regulars,maybe less computers etc,he wouldn’t have got it on,on line or in a busy shop.
They learnt this from Curley.
They will payout.
They are stalling ,as a deterrent to others,it’s a process,to make it look hard to do.
Bookies on the whole are fair,if something bad happens,they payout or return stakes,they won’t openly rip people off.
Theses guys who struck the bet,knew what they were doing,found a weak spot and targeted it..
It was an on course shop,no cameras,no regulars,maybe less computers etc,he wouldn’t have got it on,on line or in a busy shop.
They learnt this from Curley.
They will payout.
They are stalling ,as a deterrent to others,it’s a process,to make it look hard to do.
Bookies on the whole are fair,if something bad happens,they payout or return stakes,they won’t openly rip people off.
There’s limits in a lot of bookies,25k on minor bank holiday meetings
There was a 30 minute gap limit between races,to stop yankees winning within 15 mins.
But with the explosion in meetings this is harder to justify.
There was a 30 minute gap limit between races,to stop yankees winning within 15 mins.
But with the explosion in meetings this is harder to justify.
" just wish more people would actually start refusing to bet with them".
Most of us would like the option to try to relieve them of their money
Most of us would like the option to try to relieve them of their money
You can include this site in that, I had a chasey basketball bet that won, one bet, was then restricted to £0.13 for evermore.
a few seem to have introduced 'class 5s etc' in their T&Cs for payouts in recent times which just about covers 90% of the week day stuff if you do a multi.
Sportsbook, was £50 bet at evens, totally ridiculous
Wish they would put that in their terms and conditions.
Could a case be made,for them to prompt you when placing the bet.
1 pound Yankee,payout 213k,
The possible max payout on this bet is 100k,would you like to reduce your stake to 0.45 p Yankee.
You could argue,they shouldn’t accept a bet that they know can’t be paid out.that is fleecing you.
Given computers ,AI,they know at the time you are over staking,so they shouldn’t accept bet.
Accept each way is different as the place part is worth doing .
1 pound Yankee,payout 213k,
The possible max payout on this bet is 100k,would you like to reduce your stake to 0.45 p Yankee.
You could argue,they shouldn’t accept a bet that they know can’t be paid out.that is fleecing you.
Given computers ,AI,they know at the time you are over staking,so they shouldn’t accept bet.
Accept each way is different as the place part is worth doing .
that's the problem, you don't want to reduce stake because you're not expecting to cop the lot. 6 winners pays 1Mill, 5 winners pays 100K, reduce your stake and get the 5 up you win far less than planned.
I've been ripped off by Ladcrookes at least twice over the years.
Once when I made a staking mistake on a slip resulting in giving them £50 but writing three bets at £10, the slip receipt confirmed I had paid £50. I only realised because some of the bets had won and they merely refunded me £20. I was told a long time later they had settled wrong according to their own t&c's (they should have divided overstake on all three bets). Its not as though they ever advise punters who accidently overstake.
The second time was when I opened a telephone account and they gave me a free bet on the Welsh GN & The Mandarin Chase. It was the year Master Oats won a rescheduled Grand National at Newbury. Both horses won and after the bet won they refused to pay out the double advising the bet was offered on the basis the Welsh National would be run at Chepstow (they knew it was being run at Newbury when I placed the free bet). I've never bet with them since.
Once when I made a staking mistake on a slip resulting in giving them £50 but writing three bets at £10, the slip receipt confirmed I had paid £50. I only realised because some of the bets had won and they merely refunded me £20. I was told a long time later they had settled wrong according to their own t&c's (they should have divided overstake on all three bets). Its not as though they ever advise punters who accidently overstake.
The second time was when I opened a telephone account and they gave me a free bet on the Welsh GN & The Mandarin Chase. It was the year Master Oats won a rescheduled Grand National at Newbury. Both horses won and after the bet won they refused to pay out the double advising the bet was offered on the basis the Welsh National would be run at Chepstow (they knew it was being run at Newbury when I placed the free bet). I've never bet with them since.
Swiftly,fair play didn’t think of that.
Even crazy accas ,winnings 10 million,but place part worth 1k
So only on win accas can it work.
Even crazy accas ,winnings 10 million,but place part worth 1k
So only on win accas can it work.
CUTH, I agree on accas, I've had this debate before, you could hit the limit with more to run, you can only lose. The response was an acca means 'all selections must win', I know race times may change so they're not to know when the 'unwinnable' selections may run, still frustrating, feel you should be able to state 'stop at limit' or words to that effect.
Storm Alert, that just sounds like normal behaviour from bookies, I doubt you'd have got the stake back if it had lost.
Re. the staking they normally settle according to bet instructions and return overstakes.
And they don't give you the option to pay stake later if understaked! If they win!
Storm Alert, that just sounds like normal behaviour from bookies, I doubt you'd have got the stake back if it had lost.
Re. the staking they normally settle according to bet instructions and return overstakes.
And they don't give you the option to pay stake later if understaked! If they win!
Just tested an acca tomoz 6 million.
Would still allow me to place it,but to be fair a prompt came up saying max payout 1 million.
Like I said,they are fair over all.but obvious make sure the rules are edged in their favour.
Would still allow me to place it,but to be fair a prompt came up saying max payout 1 million.
Like I said,they are fair over all.but obvious make sure the rules are edged in their favour.
Ha! I've put plenty on over the years to win £20 odd million, I'd be happy with the million, the 100K that's been sneaked in there would be a bit of a downer to say the least!
You could have won 20 million if you'd spread your bets and shopped around(if only it were possible), you will only win 1 million now as per our limit, oh dear, hang on, it included a class 5, so just the 100K, and hang on again how the hell did you pick them , we smell a rat, we shall withhold payment.
Half the time they won’t even let you bet on a multiple in a shop, golf players to win best asian, multipled with golf player best American, singles only allowed!
Presume the 100k was because it was an on course shop.they seem a law to themselves.
Too be fair,it wasn’t 1 million at the big 4 years ago.
It was 250k,but less on night meeting,bank holiday not covered on the blower meetings.etc etc.
But given all meetings are now the same,has they pushed for more racing,Sundays ,Good Friday etc,plus the Irish meetings are the same ,can’t see how they can have different rules.they can’t blame the phone lines down.
The lowest max I’ve seen,was 10k on any meeting.at the Ambleside Lake District shop.pencils only,no slips just a piece of white paper,got a till receipt for you bet,so you forgot who you’d backed.
Too be fair,it wasn’t 1 million at the big 4 years ago.
It was 250k,but less on night meeting,bank holiday not covered on the blower meetings.etc etc.
But given all meetings are now the same,has they pushed for more racing,Sundays ,Good Friday etc,plus the Irish meetings are the same ,can’t see how they can have different rules.they can’t blame the phone lines down.
The lowest max I’ve seen,was 10k on any meeting.at the Ambleside Lake District shop.pencils only,no slips just a piece of white paper,got a till receipt for you bet,so you forgot who you’d backed.
Hi Swifty, you hit the nail on the head though, I've never seen a bookmakers put up list of accidently overstaked losing bets for punters to claim refunds.
Some bookmakers have a rule of settling in proportion to the amount paid rather than returning the excess stake on over-staked bets, which seems fairer as accidently overstaked losing bet are probably rarely picked up.
Some bookmakers have a rule of settling in proportion to the amount paid rather than returning the excess stake on over-staked bets, which seems fairer as accidently overstaked losing bet are probably rarely picked up.
CC, that's the stupid thing, multis are stacked in their favour, they've got all the technology to keep a check on things, but won't lay the bet.
It just seems the rulebook is ambiguous enough to cover all eventualities if a punter manages to strike lucky. Unless of course they need a bit of good publicity then it'll be on twitter within 30 seconds.
the days of hoping for the life-changing bet seem a distant memory, you really aren't allowed to win....even if you win.
the days of hoping for the life-changing bet seem a distant memory, you really aren't allowed to win....even if you win.
Casino prizes constantly got higher. Sport’s limits constantly lower last 10 years
Yep.
It’s ironic they’ve limited fobts to 2 quid,and now pushing casinos more on line.which is even worse and drags in more customers,365,betfair didnt have shops.
Plus shops did actually shut,now it’s 24 hours.presume spin times are less than the fobts.
So the 2 quid saviour was a disaster.
It’s ironic they’ve limited fobts to 2 quid,and now pushing casinos more on line.which is even worse and drags in more customers,365,betfair didnt have shops.
Plus shops did actually shut,now it’s 24 hours.presume spin times are less than the fobts.
So the 2 quid saviour was a disaster.
CUTH, luckily betfair exists albeit in a different guise to what it was. I don't mind a few creases.
hulk2323 Apr 25 20:17
was in a couple of their shops last week and i was the only person in there. during racing.
Yes, but it's the online punters with them that really get me for these bookie sites. There's hoards of online punters obviously around supplying these 'bookies'.
was in a couple of their shops last week and i was the only person in there. during racing.
Yes, but it's the online punters with them that really get me for these bookie sites. There's hoards of online punters obviously around supplying these 'bookies'.
racing669923 Apr 25 21:46Joined: 20 Dec 17 | Topic/replies: 1,455 | Blogger: racing6699's blog
Casino prizes constantly got higher. Sport’s limits constantly lower last 10 years
Casino & slots are no better. There have been plenty instances now of degenerate slot addicts winning the "Jackpot" - and then being told that it was a "programming error".
Casino prizes constantly got higher. Sport’s limits constantly lower last 10 years
Casino & slots are no better. There have been plenty instances now of degenerate slot addicts winning the "Jackpot" - and then being told that it was a "programming error".
True. The famous 'errors' that always lead to payouts refused but they only seem to be noticed when a player wins not when a customer loses. Strange coincidence indeed
Made The Times newspaper
Probably will capulate now
Probably will capulate now
This is when the CEO should step in. Its brand name is being ridiculed, and tarnished. Other bookies have already paid out. A case of damage limitation now, I'd have thought; grin and bare it would be my advice to this ever-regressing bookie.
I've just noticed the names of the two horses involved were Rocky's Diamond and Diamond Nora. Imagine an ordinary punter picking selections on names only irrespective of form, the punter could easily have picked these two horses, very possibly have taken the prices too.
Would 'ladcrook' still hold payment?
Would 'ladcrook' still hold payment?
dats why he shud have used his nogging and got 10 pensioners to plaice the bets.
Rico, he would have been refused payout under the collusion rule, x number of people placing the same or similar bets, if he'd followed your suggestion ^^^
Just looked up their rules whilst watching the snooker... Paraphrasing but basically... They say they can withhold payment if they suspect that the integrity of the sport has been compromised. I'm assuming this is the rule they are hiding behind. Even then, it says payment withheld until the relevant sporting body has finished investigations.
The investigations are not gonna change the results on the day whatever they decide
Surely Laddies must give up soon and admit defeat?
Just looked up their rules whilst watching the snooker... Paraphrasing but basically... They say they can withhold payment if they suspect that the integrity of the sport has been compromised. I'm assuming this is the rule they are hiding behind. Even then, it says payment withheld until the relevant sporting body has finished investigations.
The investigations are not gonna change the results on the day whatever they decide
Surely Laddies must give up soon and admit defeat?
they will have to swallow reg or they could face a Gerald Ratner event of brand damage !
Great question,maybe because it isn’t a small claim.
Plus it’s in Ireland do they even have small claims courts.
Or are disputes settled bare knuckle,or road bowling.
Or are disputes settled bare knuckle,or road bowling.
For every one of these that gets publicly ten more that dont is my guess so they simply lost the gamble that it would get publicity. Looks awful for laddies
If you read what the ‘stable lad’ says in the first post you can’t help but laugh at the story though.
The absolute fact that it was a plot is irrelevant because it cannot be proved.
Pay out is inevitable
Pay out is inevitable
Upiron,correct,Barney trained them well,they ve done it correctly within the rules,
They will have to pay.
They will have to pay.
Plots aren't illegal or against the rules. They simply took advantage of the fact that the profile of the horses meant the market assumed they wouldn't be off. Which is the case for dozens of horses every day of the week for everyday yards running in maidens. Perhaps the bets all weren't super mathematically effective, but the planning was, and a big risk for them to save good horses for the plot, the timing, keeping knowledge of it away from any trading. One whisper or leak could have killed the whole thing. May well be that they weren't 'off' for their first runs but impossible to prove. Not like running down the field for two years.
yards horses were running poorly but the lad said he saw signs in their work that they were turning a corner and acted on it .
Come on, probably wasn’t even his money that paid for the bet.
You can apply to a county court to claim money you’re owed by a person or business.
This is known as making a court claim. It often used to be known as taking someone to a ‘small claims court’. You can apply online or by post.
This is known as making a court claim. It often used to be known as taking someone to a ‘small claims court’. You can apply online or by post.
Come on, probably wasn’t even his money that paid for the bet.
What has that got to do with anything ??
What has that got to do with anything ??
So when is the so called " inquiry " due to end ??? That only affects Ladcrooks !
I do have some sympathy for Bookmakers trying to lay bets in the wild west but,if you take a bet and name your odds you have to smile and pay up
Exactly, just what is it Ladcrooks are waiting to hear from this enquiry that will llead them to NOT payout ?? Unless the Horses were found to be drugged I dont know. ??
It's a wind up Glasgow.
In the old days (pre video surveillance} their locks would have been glued up ad infinitum
In the old days (pre video surveillance} their locks would have been glued up ad infinitum
All the same, the idea that this stable lad will have £300K in his bank for himself is for the birds. I’m all for them having to pay up to genuine bets but this one isn’t.
GC... Even if the horses were found to be drugged, the result on the day stands for payout purposes... Laddies can't introduce their own rules regarding that, imo
Captain... In what sense isn't it genuine?
Captain... In what sense isn't it genuine?
It isn’t like any other punter going through form and picking out winners though is it Reg? I don’t think this sort of behaviour should be condoned as it doesn’t help the game. For instance I went to a local bookie to place a lucky 63, £63 it was. Imagine my shock and surprise when the employee gets on the phone to check they can take it! This sort of thing has made them completely paranoid, no wonder it is difficult to get a bet on now.
in other words captain they just confirm they only want clueless losers ! which is what we know anyway!
So when you spend your time going through two year old form and breeding and turn up to the bookies only to have them suspect that you’re part of a syndicate do you think that is right?
I gave up studying form 6 years ago ...... others more succesfull may use it but imo its a waste of time .
Captain, as Foyles says
The bet is genuine, just from someone with more clue than most regarding these particular horses
As for your lucky63 bet, I imagine the cashier just made the phone call as part of the routine to ptl because of the possible liabilities... Or you're marked down in the shop as a shrewdie
The bet is genuine, just from someone with more clue than most regarding these particular horses
As for your lucky63 bet, I imagine the cashier just made the phone call as part of the routine to ptl because of the possible liabilities... Or you're marked down in the shop as a shrewdie
I had a look at your recent post Folyes, part of it says that a horse stayed on well after a sluggish start, that’s form study!
Doubt it Reg, I think they just check every fricking lucky 63, unless you are pist.
not serious form study captain I usually spend 5 mins max on a race ,the rest of the time is watching prices fluctuate, I used to spend an hour or so going through form on one race it didn't do me any favours .
the lad and others have outsmarted them and they don't like it !
they've made a mistake putting up the prices ,punters make mistakes all the time with prices but the difference is we have accept it !
what the prices on here for lads to be 150/1 and 80/1
340 and 160 ?
340 and 160 ?
they probably went off around 30 and 20ish on here and the second one wouldn't have been that if all the bets on the first one were placed on here. So about a 650-1 double. I'd rather the 10,000-1 at guaranteed prices.
The big prices were early prices I think - they're would not have been much liquidity in the market on here then to take a big price for more than pocket money.
BSPs 60 and 26.64
BSPs 60 and 26.64
The big prices were early prices I think - they're would not have been much liquidity in the market on here then to take a big price for more than pocket money.
BSPs 60 and 26.64
BSPs 60 and 26.64
they certainly didnt 'outsmart' them going 200k over the limit. 3 people put on the same bet to get round the camera evidence. it aint rocket surgery
you would assume they took what they could at the wackier prices on here
you would assume they took what they could at the wackier prices on here
They didn't know what the prices would be, or if the bets would be accepted. The mission was to get the bets down, over staking a second order issue. imo.
they must have known the prices. youd hardly land a touch not knowing, and every race is priced up so its inconceivable they didnt
if you ask for a 3 figure price it is automatically referred so it might be they had a staff member oiled up, hence refusal to pay, which is understandable and might explain why he (they) sat on it for a year
if you ask for a 3 figure price it is automatically referred so it might be they had a staff member oiled up, hence refusal to pay, which is understandable and might explain why he (they) sat on it for a year
Ladbrokes settle stable lad's six-figure bet after discussions with the IHRB
Ladbrokes will settle all outstanding bets on the Declan Queally-trained pair Diamond Nora and Rocky's Diamond from their respective races on April 19, 2024, meaning stable lad Dylan Phelan's €30 each-way double will be paid out.
Stable lad Phelan, who works for Declan Queally at his Waterford stable, placed the bet at a Ladbrokes shop in Limerick on the morning of the races at prices of 80-1 and 125-1 for a life-changing payout of €319,440 (£272,694.75), although Ladbrokes's maximum payout limit for a wager placed over the counter in a betting shop for the relevant races is €100,000.
After both horses won Ladbrokes declined to settle the bet on the basis that the races were under investigation by the IHRB after the raceday stewards at Limerick and Ballinrobe inquired as to the apparent improvement in form and referred the matter on to an IHRB referrals committee.
The matter has been highly publicised in recent days and Ladbrokes told the Racing Post on Tuesday that the decision to withhold payment was entirely consistent with their terms and conditions.
However, after further talks with the IHRB, they have elected to settle all bets relating to the two horses, although the investigation remains ongoing.
A statement from the bookmaker read: "We have now discussed this matter with the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board (IHRB) in order to seek a resolution as quickly as possible. Although the IHRB is unable to provide details of the investigation, or its likely duration, we are satisfied that it is appropriate to proceed with payment of the relevant bets in accordance with our terms and conditions.”
https://www.racingpost.com/news/ireland/ladbrokes-settle-stable-lads-six-figure-bet-after-discussions-with-the-ihrb-aQJKU8w9gpsH/
Ladbrokes will settle all outstanding bets on the Declan Queally-trained pair Diamond Nora and Rocky's Diamond from their respective races on April 19, 2024, meaning stable lad Dylan Phelan's €30 each-way double will be paid out.
Stable lad Phelan, who works for Declan Queally at his Waterford stable, placed the bet at a Ladbrokes shop in Limerick on the morning of the races at prices of 80-1 and 125-1 for a life-changing payout of €319,440 (£272,694.75), although Ladbrokes's maximum payout limit for a wager placed over the counter in a betting shop for the relevant races is €100,000.
After both horses won Ladbrokes declined to settle the bet on the basis that the races were under investigation by the IHRB after the raceday stewards at Limerick and Ballinrobe inquired as to the apparent improvement in form and referred the matter on to an IHRB referrals committee.
The matter has been highly publicised in recent days and Ladbrokes told the Racing Post on Tuesday that the decision to withhold payment was entirely consistent with their terms and conditions.
However, after further talks with the IHRB, they have elected to settle all bets relating to the two horses, although the investigation remains ongoing.
A statement from the bookmaker read: "We have now discussed this matter with the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board (IHRB) in order to seek a resolution as quickly as possible. Although the IHRB is unable to provide details of the investigation, or its likely duration, we are satisfied that it is appropriate to proceed with payment of the relevant bets in accordance with our terms and conditions.”
https://www.racingpost.com/news/ireland/ladbrokes-settle-stable-lads-six-figure-bet-after-discussions-with-the-ihrb-aQJKU8w9gpsH/
I’m sure it would be life changing if he actually kept the money himself.
Ladcrookes has no shame. Ladcrookes needs to be dragged kicking and screaming in public before paying out despite IHRB has cleared the horses, and the winning punter; two other bookies paid out many months ago.
This was a no brainer decision yet Ladcrookes chose to drag it out for over 12 months before coming to a sensible and only decision ie payout the winning punter.
Bettors beware! Bet with Ladcrookes at your peril!
This was a no brainer decision yet Ladcrookes chose to drag it out for over 12 months before coming to a sensible and only decision ie payout the winning punter.
Bettors beware! Bet with Ladcrookes at your peril!
Ladbrokes play a blinder.
Headline,Ladbrokes pays out big winning punter.
Real headline,Ladbrokes pays out one third to punter.
Headline,Ladbrokes pays out big winning punter.
Real headline,Ladbrokes pays out one third to punter.
200 large Missing , if only the fella had checked the Small print before placing his Bet as we all do
have they returned the part of the Steak That Could not win ?
Any multi ever placed with them with such Restrictions needs to be dug out and Steaks returned on the percentage of the bet that could not win if Applicable
Would cost them an awful lot more than 200 K
have they returned the part of the Steak That Could not win ?
Any multi ever placed with them with such Restrictions needs to be dug out and Steaks returned on the percentage of the bet that could not win if Applicable
Would cost them an awful lot more than 200 K
keep an eye on this Stable , would be lovely to see them go again 
They had an 18-1 winner on the Anniversary ,I hope they got a few quid
They had an 18-1 winner on the Anniversary ,I hope they got a few quid
Take the 100 K and take them to Court , they were basically robbing £20 ofF the Customer
What would have happened if bet was on 3 different slips ?
What would have happened if bet was on 3 different slips ?
Nanny, wouldn't have made any difference doing it on 3 separate slips... Would have put it down as coming from the same source, collusion and applied the limit across the bets
Rico the answer to your question is no.Wont have cost entain anything just take it out of the sleepers take it from your uncle Ronnie that figure is frightening.
Have a good days guys and gals of to another all day.
Looking forward to a lovely selection of meats when I get back washed down with a nice Malbec.
Ronnie.
Have a good days guys and gals of to another all day.
Looking forward to a lovely selection of meats when I get back washed down with a nice Malbec.
Ronnie.
ladbrokes played a blinder..headlines ladbrooks pay out on bet....would be punter yeah a year later and and 200,k less than the bet came to and had to be dragged kicking and screaming ,....shall i put my bets on with them ?.......er no i think ill use billies up the road.
if 3 people put the bet on they cant claim its from the same person so its inexplicable they didnt do this
Post this case I hope the Gambling Commission will insist that mainland bookies contribute financially towards a fund for possible betting disputes, etc, which might end up in the court of law for final adjudication.
A bookie cannot be allowed to withhold/deny payment on terms and conditions drafted by themselves, and not approved by the betting/gaming regulator.
A bookie cannot be allowed to withhold/deny payment on terms and conditions drafted by themselves, and not approved by the betting/gaming regulator.
the discourse around this is pretty mental. You can't be expecting cashiers or magic AI tills to be reckoning up multiples and advising max stakes. The queues would soon p iss people off. The current status quo that the onus being on the punter to read the rules and stake accordingly is fine.
This bet specifically I doubt even if he was told the max win part it would have changed his behaviour, seems to me he likely more wanted the place part of the double at these prices
This bet specifically I doubt even if he was told the max win part it would have changed his behaviour, seems to me he likely more wanted the place part of the double at these prices
In the old days one could have doggie forecast trebles, and upwards. Now no more. I'm sure the bookies could put up a poster indicating there's a daily max payout on horses, doggies, etc, to minimise or avoid future bets disputes.
^
That’s just not true imbecile123, bookies still take forecast trebles and upwards.
Stop coming on here continuously posting total garbage.
That’s just not true imbecile123, bookies still take forecast trebles and upwards.
Stop coming on here continuously posting total garbage.
if 3 people put the bet on they cant claim its from the same person so its inexplicable they didnt do this
He obviously didnt know the rules , but tbh I think he was probably thinking along the lines of the place double
Surely he had a couple of EW singles at those odds in the same shop ?
I dont know what goes on in Shops these Days Ronnie , but if you took the 30 EW double at those odds would you have to ring it over ,
Or if other similar bets are struck would the System pick it up ?
Im sure you yourself would have given it a 2nd Glance
He obviously didnt know the rules , but tbh I think he was probably thinking along the lines of the place double
Surely he had a couple of EW singles at those odds in the same shop ?
I dont know what goes on in Shops these Days Ronnie , but if you took the 30 EW double at those odds would you have to ring it over ,
Or if other similar bets are struck would the System pick it up ?
Im sure you yourself would have given it a 2nd Glance
You would certainly have been giving it a few Glances after the first one Won
They could have been Turned over for Millions for no Money ,Crazy when you think about it
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539