Teenager takes bet365 to court over £1m

General chatter about that dark and cold world of only back betting.
Post Reply
User avatar
Euler
Posts: 24700
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 1:39 pm
Location: Bet Angel HQ

Money laundering kicks in at low amounts so it's amazing they would accept a bet of such liability without a large balance or consistent staking. Surely a red flag would have been triggered.
oscar123
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:18 am

That's what I was thinking, surely that bet was referred to traders.

The only thing I can think is if there was a glitch in the system where if she put on all the bets individually that they would sneak under the radar. As it would have been £390 for each individual lucky, maybe they knew that was the amount they could get through without referral to trading.

But even then, surely there were some sort of alerts after the first few were placed, some were bad e/w too which usually means limits are even tighter.

Be interesting to see what happens.
User avatar
Naffman
Posts: 5626
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 5:46 am

26K on 1 accumulator by a 19yo is far more staggering than B365 not paying out imo :lol:

Pros wouldn't even put that on one horse let alone a number of horses :lol:
oscar123
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:18 am

I'm not sure about the staking actually, it says in the report 960 lucky 13 e/w lucky fifteens, though I think that might means £26 total stake, not unit. So maybe that is how they slipped through as the unit state was much smaller.

Out of interest, do you have the graph for Mr.Right from the 830 Naas, 22/06/2016? That was the last leg. I see it went from 6/1 to 11/4 on course.
oscar123
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:18 am

They were mostly bad e/w though. I'm sure they were going to get some kind of a return off that. They obviously hit the jackpot and got the lot.

It's more intriguing to know how they got the bet on!
User avatar
Euler
Posts: 24700
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 1:39 pm
Location: Bet Angel HQ

I got barred for placing about 1500 bets in an odd combination, that I knew had a fair chance of winning. That was back in early 90's. So it may not be dodgy at all, just some decent math.
Samo154
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:44 am

Not sure she wins, 19 year old betting 26k they must have evidence of it being connected to someone else banned or criminal
User avatar
BetScalper
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 10:47 pm

The court will rule in the bookies favour. They nearly always do anyway. I know someone that won £2.8 million at a London Casino, they refused to pay him out, citing cheating. Court ruled in the Casino's favour.
User avatar
megarain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 1:26 pm
Contact:

That case was v different.

I am a backer she gets paid, at evens (up to £100, for an interest).

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Law-Gamblers-L ... 1935396625 is quite a dry book, but, if u intend a career in the USA, robaby worth reading.

Cheating laws there, are v different, especially in card games.
User avatar
Tuco
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:43 pm

If bet365 were concerned as to the source of the funds she must have deposited in her bet365 account, that was the time to ask questions. not after the bets she subsequently placed won - too late then. There is a risk when either placing or taking a bet - it is a contract that both parties must satisfy their part thereof depending on the result of the event in question.

If she loses in court, we could all borrow money from someone, documenting the entire transaction and if we lose claim our bet breached their terms and conditions, cite this case as a precident and request a refund. The law does not permit them to have it both ways!
User avatar
jimibt
Posts: 3641
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:42 pm
Location: Narnia

Tuco wrote:
Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:21 am
If bet365 were concerned as to the source of the funds she must have deposited in her bet365 account, that was the time to ask questions. not after the bets she subsequently placed won - too late then. There is a risk when either placing or taking a bet - it is a contract that both parties must satisfy their part thereof depending on the result of the event in question.

If she loses in court, we could all borrow money from someone, documenting the entire transaction and if we lose claim our bet breached their terms and conditions, cite this case as a precident and request a refund. The law does not permit them to have it both ways!
+1 - i like your thinking and was similar to what I alluded to in an earlier post regards the funds being a *documented loan*. would definitely foil all losses and would love to see the bookies explaining how they have had it both ways since adam was a boy and now the applecart is being overturned.
User avatar
SeaHorseRacing
Posts: 2893
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 7:06 pm

Bet 365 would only be making such a scandalous claim if they have the evidence.

I would assume that this bet is a copy cat bet from someone who has already been banned or convicted of such crime...

For example. Some guy had been banned for placing such bets as it turned out A)they were too clever and additionally B) some form of illegal activity such as money laundering.

So I assume that this bet placed by a 19 yr old is an identical bet placed before by someone banned. If this is the case Bet365 will win.

I think it is highly likely this is the case.

Still A bet placed especially through electronics i.e online should be paid no matter what. Its not like they wrote it on a betting slip. If there offering the bet and have accepted it, it should be paid. Its their job to decide whether to not accept it.
Sounds like a money laundering system to me.

Lucky 15's pay double and most pay triple the odds for one winner and there is a group in the UK today that are money laundering using this system and it does work. It probably just turns out they got a little too lucky and hit a jackpot.

Additionally 26k returning 1 Million is less then 50/1 in total. Just cannot see Bet365 losing this one.
User avatar
megarain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 1:26 pm
Contact:

Triple and Quadruple odds for one winner (back in the day), were fun.

I knew one super-shroodie, who asked for £50k of virtual racing, permed L15's at b365.

He got on . for one day, I think.

//

Having said this, B365 are a firm, who deserve some respect. They generally keep their word, which is unlike some of the other scum.

All the shops have now gone .. and they have 22 milion customers ..a lot in Asia. I wonder what would have happened, if an asian client had placed the bet, on a www.365888365.com portal.
User avatar
LeTiss
Posts: 5386
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:04 pm

I back Megarain up, I have dealt with Bet365 on a few occasions, and I have found them to be pretty straight. I once had a very large win when hedging, after Betfair had an outage and I needed to get matched elsewhere.......quickly. They honoured the bet, paid out immediately, and never banned me

I would suggest this women's account was being funded by somebody already banned by Bet365, and her bets mirrored the blacklisted customer
User avatar
SeaHorseRacing
Posts: 2893
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 7:06 pm

Yep Credit were credit is due. I am banned from all bookmakers and Bet365 are by far the most fair and honest bookmaker going... however I still believe they are bad just like them all... but if I needed to get on I would personally only use someone who would use bet365 because I know I would get paid out without any hassle.
Post Reply

Return to “Bookmaker & Sportsbooks”