Tennis
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
the mugs had the great donald young at 7/4 after he won first set..mugs..i ploughed in
they say bet taken in error and will be settled at 4/11..where do i stand?
they say bet taken in error and will be settled at 4/11..where do i stand?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 11
|
By:
lol you have no rights unfortunately they can do what they want
|
|
By:
they give you a receipt with the time the price etc..but at the end of the day its worth nowt.
 |
|
By:
if young had lost would my bet have been returned?...no..nope not a chance..thieving swine
who would back donald young at 4/11..and how did they decide that price? |
|
By:
that cant be right . they offered the odds , u accepted , that binds the contract .
|
|
By:
not according to them
|
|
By:
exactly.
their rules doesnt matter here,if you would go to small claim court |
|
By:
We are contacting you regarding bet ID RQ1414977611I placed at the odds of 7/4 on Donald Young (To Win Match James Blake vs Donald Young). We have identified that this selection was placed at incorrect odds and as such, in accordance with our rules, will be settled at the revised odds of 4/11.
|
|
By:
sounds they like had the odds reversed, odds should have been young 4/11 and blake 7/4. clear case of palp/bad line and they have the right to void in accordance with their rules.
|
|
By:
Yep a palpable error(odds transposed) which you must have been aware of or you wouldn't have 'piled on' Your argument that they wouldn't have given your stake back if Young had lost doesn't stack up as they haven't refused to pay you - you just received less of a return on your bet.If Young had lost it wouldn't matter if you got him at 100/1 you still would've lost your stake -it is a bummer I know but errors do occur and I think you'll agree that you knew that the odds were way out of line when you placed the bet - if something seems too good to be true it normally is .
|
|
By:
Yep a palpable error(odds transposed) which you must have been aware of or you wouldn't have 'piled on' Your argument that they wouldn't have given your stake back if Young had lost doesn't stack up as they haven't refused to pay you - you just received less of a return on your bet.If Young had lost it wouldn't matter if you got him at 100/1 you still would've lost your stake -it is a bummer I know but errors do occur and I think you'll agree that you knew that the odds were way out of line when you placed the bet - if something seems too good to be true it normally is .
|
|
By:
Guinn1 11 Jan 13 03:59 Your argument that they wouldn't have given your stake back if Young had lost doesn't stack up I don't agree with this. The bookmaker made the error and therefore it is their own mistake for setting incorrect odds and not the person making the bet. I agree with the original poster that if Young had lost his stake wouldn't have been refunded and the bookmaker wouldn't have done anything. The poster's argument does stack up if Young had lost because he most probably wouldn't have taken the bet if the odds weren't those stated. |