ozy, I am disappointed with your attitude towards kincsem.


I don't know kincsem from adam, but I applaud you all the way for your persistence. You are 100% entitled by the law  of the land via the Data Protection Act to force any bookmaker to furnish all the details they hold about you, be it life time account details or "notes".

PP have played hard ball with your legitimate attempts to unlock that detail. you have acquiesced to their various requests, passport/fee, and when your then receive partially encrypted information, it obviously does not correlate to your accounts of transactions with them. Put simply, the PP historic trial is either a poorly maintained file or they have deliberately withheld information.

in pursuing this episode, you have proven to all, that getting transparency from bookmakers could be a near impossible task, save for perhaps Betfair.


In the past few years, we have seen a sequence of events casting PP in a very poor light....the Gorey postal worker, specials stopped in offices throughout the country, lowering limits on internet customers that had the cheek to win, and more recently markets with ridiculously high margins.

We will look back on the period of 2002-2007 as the golden era for punters. The last few years in Ireland on the high street, we have seen the demise of the independent.....whether you liked these independents or not, their presence created competition...PP in particular were very generous with offers in the face of local independents....sadly most of these independents have either sold up  or ceased, and PP and Byles are getting close to a monopoly in many towns(Laddies do exist, but can you get on with them?).

We are now moving to a position almost back to 20 years ago....should you be severely limited on-line, all that is left now, part from the exchange, is to try the shops again...BUT with PP's accountants tightening the belt all the time, shop punters may soon be struggling to get 200 or 300 quid on a 3/1 shot in a shop........the PP corporate ideal, is to have loads of mug 10 quid punters playing away on those miserable 5/1 field handicaps you find in the corrupt all weather racing, not laying bets of over a 100 quid.

If you think things are bad now, it will only get worse..........have a look at the "election budget proposals" of Sinn Fein/IRA...........they are recommending to re-introduce a betting tax of 3% to be imposed on all shop punters........no doubt to be gathered up and re-distributed to the welfare scroungers they seem to protect throughout the island.

again well done Kincsem, I think a wee correspondence with Declan Lynch of the Sunday Independent may be mutually beneficial.

As keen leader says, well done on requesting and getting your data info from PP, kincsem.

Ozy, we should all be persistent in revealing the reality of modern day gambling and in seeking legislative changes to help in the protection of that small minority of people who have a gambling problem.

For myself, I wrote a letter to PP requesting the info they held about me under the Freedom Of Information Act 2014 last April. I enclosed a cheque for 6.35 euro (admin fee) and verified my ID.

I found the whole process very efficient and had, what I considered to be accurate info and customer attribute notes regarding my betting activity only, sent to me within 30 days. During that time I also spoke with the PP Online Support team leader who offered to give me my info over the phone.  I preferred to receive it by post as I was forwarding it on to Richard Oakley of the Sunday Times (Ireland) to help him in his paper's revelations regarding the reality of present day online "bookmaking".

My date of birth was give as 28/02/1900 but I think the reason for this was to protect my ID in the event of the info falling into the wrong hands (everybody knows their own date of birth).

"V.I.P.". They also enclosed an invitation with tickets , as their guest, to the Europa League Final and the Irish Derby at the Curragh.

You are easily intrigued, just a throwaway remark

Tell us more about the fascinating minutiae of your visits.  What colour were the walls and was the floor carpeted or tiled?

5 live did a piece on this this morning , one person who operates a tipping line said that 52% of his subscribers were restricted , and over 75% of his subscribers had issues with the bookies .  Bookies declining to comment though , except for Billys and Paddys who couched their responses in the usual fashion suggesting they were the punters friend rather than the enemy .

Tend to stick up for PP here though all the same, Kinscem is in profit on his account and despite he didn't like/agree with just getting the E45 on,it was at 50/1 giving a liability for them of over 2k,fair enough imo.

Ah Mincer i know we are all in fairly bad form with the rugby diaappointment but tis more than a bag of chips according to the figures on page 2, he is still getting a fair crack.

Interesting post on boards.ie about bookie spyware on your computer
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057510589

I checked my computer.
There is a iesnare directory on my computer dated ....... 09/10/2015 ......

I think the facts are getting conveniently  "glossed over" here.
Kinscem (1)your  account is well in profit and (2)they are laying you to a liability of 2k.

I consider that very fair,whatever about dodgy offers,very poor overnight prices etc, they don't deserve a complaint in your case.

So the accusation on boards.ie that ieSnare allows bookmakers to know the type of sites you visit & sport you bet on in great detail.  seems inaccurate to me.

And all the people blaming ieSnare for getting them restricted....that's seems wrong too...unless they are all multiple account holders, which I doubt.

That said, I know feck all about this, just learning through reading comments which may or may not be accurate.

This ieSnare is new to me.  I learned about it on boards.ie this morning

This was posted by me on this thread at 01:49 Saturday 10 Oct 2015
"Paddy Power sent me two e-mails in response to my Data Protection request timed 17:09 Wed 07/10/2015 with five attachments."
"I found them in my e-mail this evening  09/10/2015 Friday (I was out on Thursday) 08 Oct 2015"

The words in bold were added now to clarify the sequence.

I said earlier today
There is a iesnare directory on my computer dated ....... 09/10/2015

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

It is clear to me that Paddy Power included ieSnare with the five attachments they sent in their e-mail dated 17:09 Wednesday 07/10/2015.
I opened that e-mail on Friday 09/10/2015 and since then ieSnare is on my PC.
Paddy Power did not tell me they were sending me ieSnare, or that it was going on my PC when I opened their e-mail / attachments.
I did have a three hour loss of broadband that evening, and some file downloading / updating on shutdown and startup - I thought it was Windows 7, and that is possible.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bookmakers will make the case that it is an anti-fraud measure.
(1) ieSnare software allows subscribers (quote from the link below) "for example if you use the same machine to sign up to two or more different sites that use the iesnare system, each site will know that you’ve recently signed up somewhere else and potentially earmark you as a criminal or abuser"
or
(2) know that you are betting on other gambling sites, and probably the amounts.
(3) in my face to face discussion in PP reception I asked was my information shared with other organisations.  The answer was NO.
If Paddy Power put my information on the Iovation servers (suppliers of ieSnare) for other gambling companies to access then the NO answer was incorrect.

Websire with more information
http://www.thegamblingtimes.com/board/day-day-life/10018-iesnare-make-sure-youre-not-being-snooped.html

(2) above is my guess at what bookmakers do.  They will identify winners, and stop them.  In the bookmaking world winners are probably seen as fraudsters.
"Quickly identify, reward and retain your VIP customers with enticing promotions and an excellent playing experience. This will engage them more, keep them on your site longer, and increase your bottom line."

When you log into PP, iesnare is automatically on your PC...unless you have taken measures to block it.  No need for them to email it to you.  Did you login on 19/10?

I,m not greatest with computers but did a search for mpsnare and deleted the two files which contained them.
Both seemed to be part of "flash player".
Betduck live video wasn't operable after the deletion of the files.
I remedied this by allowing " cookies" on betduck,the same two files are there now and video is back. It is certainly one of the files that allows the video to run and possibly the two as both contain the word "flash player".
I,d be very neutral in claiming they are malicious,maybe but doubt it,am however open to correction.

The last few months i,ve noticed a huge rise in the number of tracking cookies,going from 20/30 to hundreds in a session,considered harmless still don't like the thought of it (innocent sites honestly). Use Firefox and someone on some forum here mention use the "Self destructing cookies" add on. It kills them stone dead and "superantispyware" is now basically redundant in the tracking cookies department.

Online petitions will obviously have no effect, mainstream media and open-minded journalists are the only possible ways to communicate to some degree of a mass audience (a niche topic but maybe the bleeding heart angle could garner support) of how these publicly listed companies operate on a daily basis.
They will only ever consider changing when they're forced to do so through legislation or through mass public perception.

I will repeat some of my questions,maybe they won't be as quickly moderated on a dated thread.

a)Why didn't PP's Software not highlight the postman's reckless gambling? How was he flagged as someone to be brought on VIP trips?
b)Was this 1.7 million ever repaid to the exchequer?
c) Why is almost every punter that doesn't show problem gambling tendencies restricted?
d)Did BC ever take off the green jersey?
e)Why were 690,000 PP customers not informed that their accounts were hacked.PP had knowledge that Usernames,passwords and security questions were hacked in Canada for 4 years but failed to inform 1 customer?
f)Why are known non runners shortened to accentuate rule fours.
g)Why are problem gamblers encouraged to bet on games,casino and roulette through free bets.
h)Why can't punters have access to their profit and loss.
i)off course books manipulating the SP.

Is this perhaps one type of future litigation that you might not detest as it's a certainty to happen?

It only boils down to that analogy for those with some comprehension,I won't feign to have much an interest in their circumstances but it's a method of garnering public attention.

The data protection issue was extremely serious and was dealt with in despicable fashion by these parasites.

Another article on the new reality of online bookmaking practices from the Ireland edition of The Times :



Aaron Rogan

October 26 2015



Paddy Power paid off a problem gambler with £500 and asked him to sign a disclaimer preventing him from discussing the payment after the bookmaker failed to close the account as requested.

The customer was told to seek help for his gambling problem and to not contact Paddy Power again, but he later received text messages offering him free bets and telling him “it’s been too long”.

Chris Gray, a 31-year-old civil servant from the north of England, said that he staked £1.85 million and lost about £18,000 over 15 months. He bet mostly on casino games, wagering up to £20,000 a day, and his gambling behaviour was so erratic that Ladbrokes banned him from operating an account with it.

In October last year Mr Gray asked Paddy Power — which uses the slogan “when the fun stops, stop” — to “please close and delete my account so I cannot use it again”. This followed days of correspondence, seen by The Times, between Mr Gray and Dublin-based Jeff Power, the company’s head of customer services.

Paddy Power failed to permanently close Mr Gray’s account. He reopened it days later and lost another £1,800.

Mr Gray had come to Mr Power’s attention last October after he repeatedly asked the bookmaker for bonuses so that he could gamble more on casino games. Such behaviour is a sign of problem gambling, according to a leading addiction expert. Ladbrokes excluded Mr Gray for five years after similar behaviour in 2013.

Mr Gray had repeatedly told the company that he felt he was entitled to the bonuses due to the extent of his betting, the high amounts he was wagering and the significant losses he incurred, adding: “I can confirm that I am in full control of my gambling”.

He was given a £100 credit as a gesture of goodwill, but complained when he discovered that he would have to bet the money before he could withdraw any of it — a common practise among bookmakers. After another series of emails, Mr Gray told Mr Power to close his account.

Five days later, on October 20, Mr Gray wrote to say that he had been able to re-open his account. By October 31 he had lost £1,800.

Mr Power offered to close the account “under responsible gaming so that you cannot reopen”. Mr Gray said this was what he had wanted originally and requested the £1,800 back. On November 14 he informed Paddy Power that he had contacted his MP and he intended to complain to the Gambling Supervision Commission in the Isle of Man.

On January 23, Mr Power offered Mr Gray £500 as a gesture of goodwill to “close off the matter”. He was asked to sign a disclaimer that included not taking any further action against the company or speaking to the media.

Mr Gray said that he agreed to the disclaimer because he needed the money, but that breaching the terms was in the public interest. He made a complaint to the Isle of Man Gambling Commission, which ruled that Paddy Power had acted correctly towards him.

Paddy Power, which announced a pre-tax profit of €167 million in March, said that it did not comment on invidual cases.

“Our customer service agents are trained to recognise language or behaviour associated with problem gamblers and engage with a customer around responsible gambling to ensure we provide the safest environment possible for our customers. Excessive bonus queries or requests are one of the behaviours that may trigger a conversation about whether our customer feels they are gambling within their means,” the company said.

Paddy Power told Mr Gray that it sent free bet texts to him after he had signed the disclaimer because he had not self-excluded from retail gambling, which was separate to online.

Colin O’Gara, a consultant psychiatrist and head of addiction services at St John of God Hospital in Dublin, said that bookmakers were reluctant to address the issue of problem gamblers because they are responsible for a a disproportionate amount of the industry’s income.























































--

"Ladbrokes Ireland, which recently exited examinership after receiving €12.8 million investment from its UK parent company, would not comment on a customer’s claim that his bet was cancelled in a Dublin city centre shop when a trader in the company’s head office complained to shop staff that he had been allowed to bet €50 on a 14/1 horse."

Anybody else ever heard of a case like this?