Bookie refuses to pay out £7 million on snow bet

[burner1]

Wasn't sure wether to post this as 'serious' or 'Humerous' really:

Bookmaker Ladbrokes is refusing to pay out more than 7 million pounds to a man who gambled on a white Christmas across the UK, as the bet was accepted by mistake.

Cliff Bryant, 52, had placed two 5-pound accumulator bets that snow would fall on 24 towns and cities across the north of England on Christmas Day.
"We have apologised to the customer for any confusion and for mistakenly accepting an accumulator bet when our own rules state that only single bets are available on a market of this nature," said a Ladbrokes spokesman.
"We are happy to void the bets and to pay the customer his winnings on the relevant singles."


They however amount to just 31.78 pounds, rather than the 7.1 million Bryant was expecting.

The graphic designer from Southampton, who told the local Southern Daily Echo newspaper he was "gutted" and would seek legal advice, claims the first accumulator would have won him 4.9 million pounds, with the second adding 2.2 million.

"If I make a mistake in my work like that it costs me dearly and I think the offer should be a lot more generous than they have made," he told the paper.
Ladbrokes should have made their rules clearer, he added.
"They are one of the leading bookmakers in the country and I think they ought to do their homework a bit better in future."


Ladbrokes gave Bryant details of the Independent Betting Adjudication Service (IBAS), an impartial adjudicator on disputes that arise between gambling operators and their customers.


Danny Cracknell, a manager of the IBAS, told Reuters that Bryant had been in contact and they would be investigating the issue once he had completed the relevant forms.

>>Source<<

[SiE]

they should pay up if they took the bet.

[Mystical_2K]

surely they are liable for this? they accepted his bet, surely once he has form he can legally claim on it, they made the mistake and should stand by it

im not a gambler tho so not too clear on the rules

[lukese]

most high street betting shops, like ladbrooks, williamhill, coral and such have rules in there somewhree normally tucked out the way but they are on display and the most they will pay out reguardless of whats on the slip is listed on these rules, from memory its about 250k for uk football and horses, and 100k for internatial league football, so it wouldnt surprise me if they had a rule for weather related bets that where on "full display" even if they are tucked behind a fruit machine. theres only ever one winner, the bookie!

[{{909}}]

hope the bloke gets his cash, he made the bet, they took his cash, surely the transaction of cash is a legal bind of some sort.

[super mike]

I am very interested in how this turns out legally. Surely in accepting the bet, they signed into the contract with the client and therefore have to produce the goods.

[DelTrotter]

Stupid man betting on shit like this, he dont deserve it. I slug my guts out to make a living on the horses and he thinks a simple white christmas bet can win him millions. what a cunt!!

[Mule]

If they just paid out without making a fuss about it then they wouldn't get any advertising out of it.

[DavidF]

As much as I feel that this is bad form on Ladbrokes part IE they should be paying out a decent "gesture" when they make an error like this. It IS stated all over their website and all of their shops about their Terms & Conditions. Even when they accept a "bet" they are covered by their "Human Error" clause (Same clause is used throughout the bookmakers industry). And lastly the final nail in the coffin for this bloke (or anyone else that finds themselves in a similar situation) is the fact that gambling debts are not legally enforceable in this country, this works both ways for and against the punter/bookie.

With all that said though Ladbrokes would have done well to give this bloke a few grand as a goodwill gesture as it would then have looked good on them. But as always these types of things are at their own discretion. I have known other similar situations where bookies have paid out decent amounts and milked the free publicity ect. But like I said legally this bloke is fooked.

[theodotcom]

So does this mean we can go and put a bet on something and when we lose go back and ask for the money saying it was a mistake to put that bet in the first place.

Ladbrookes are a bunch of cnuts, they should pay, they took the bet. If he lost and went back saying they made a mistake and shouldnt have accepted that bet I'm sure they wouldnt have refunded him.

[DelTrotter]

Any 'Trader' worth his salt knows what hes getting into. all stipulations are known without doubt. this guy is a cunt.

[tiggerbiker]

I slug my guts out to make a living on the horses

YOU WHAT??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!

bent over the racing times working your ass off?

[DelTrotter]

YOU WHAT??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!

bent over the racing times working your ass off?

well not slug it out physically !! the mental side can get tough. Any trader will say that.

A crap living so far but eventually when the asset is big enough, the formula cant fail . Money management, self control, awareness and cock in the arse goes a long way in this game.

[sirdave]

so if it hadn't snowed could he get a refund as its a void bet????

wankers! pay the bloke!!!

[c0axial]

Gutted...

[stu99]

I think he'd have a case to get a settlement of some sort. I wonder if the right legal team could convince the courts that by taking the bet they'd accepted the risk.

For 7.1 mil he'll have a fair few people to help him.

[Kushty]

As others have said, I'm pretty sure the law doesn't get involved with gambling.

[greens117]

They should have bets next year what town and borough will run out of grit first ?

[super mike]

fact that gambling debts are not legally enforceable in this country, this works both ways for and against the punter/bookie.

Please find me this as I do not believe that I could go into Bill Hill tomorrow and place 500k on a match/horse/dog/whatever and then when it doesn't come in just say "Nah sorry mate, so and so blah-dee blah". I find it hard to believe that a (probably) multi billion pound industry is based on a gentlemens agreement.

[DavidF]

Please find me this as I do not believe that I could go into Bill Hill tomorrow and place 500k on a match/horse/dog/whatever and then when it doesn't come in just say "Nah sorry mate, so and so blah-dee blah". I find it hard to believe that a (probably) multi billion pound industry is based on a gentlemens agreement.

You are correct you couldn't go in to "Bill Hill" and stick 500k on whatever. Because
1. They have a maximum wager payout 2. You must bet in cash unless you have a "Credit" account. A credit account usually consists of the punter actually depositing cash with the bookmaker for him (The Punter) to "play" with. Like I said a Gambling Debt IS NOT A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE DEBT IN THIS COUNTRY. As for finding you a link ect Im a little pushed for time at the moment but a little later when I have more time I will find you a "Backup" link.

Couple of quick links
http://www.abacusfinance.co.uk/Gambling-Debt.htm
http://www.freeadviceonline.co.uk/ga...bling_bill.htm - This is a amendment where they discussed making it legal (Didnt get passed BTW)
http://thomasbarker.com/09/10/enforc...me-tobin-taxes
http://www.debtassistancesite.com/on...ing-debts.html

Of course if you borrow money from a 3rd party to gamble then you have to follow the usual rule with regards to repayment. Hope that clears things up a little for you.