Hollywood Disappoint again

There was a time when gambling debts were not legally enforceable and so all bookies "special" rules applied. They still seem to be sure that they are not subject to normal laws of contract................I believe that if I offer my stake and it is accepted, at a price, by a person acting within the scope of their employment ,that is a done deal!!!!
What we ,as a punters forum, should do is form a fund to sort out issues of this nature, in the interest of fairness.................it wouldn't get to court IMO.................I don't think the bookies would gamble on the precedent !
The problem is that it would need to be a substantial bet to make it worth contesting ,unless funded as a "test" case scenario!

Rob , would love to have the funding to do something like that

I think any recourse would first be to the Local Gambling Board and then the Consumer Ombud...

Gambling bets are not enforceable when the subject of the gambling activity is illegal eg. dog racing is illegal in SA therefore any bet on a dog racing event would be unenforceable...

But racing is governed by statute hence any bets on horse-racing is legally enforceable and subject to the laws of the land including common law ie. law of contract...

TNaicker Wrote:

---

> I think any recourse would first be to the Local
> Gambling Board and then the Consumer Ombud...
>
> Gambling bets are not enforceable when the subject
> of the gambling activity is illegal eg. dog racing
> is illegal in SA therefore any bet on a dog racing
> event would be unenforceable...
>
> But racing is governed by statute hence any bets
> on horse-racing is legally enforceable and subject
> to the laws of the land including common law ie.
> law of contract...

Don't confuse the issue TN ..............NO contract is enforceable in respect of ANY illegal activity.........not just gambling!

rob faux Wrote:

> Don't confuse the issue TN ..............NO
> contract is enforceable in respect of ANY illegal
> activity.........not just gambling!

Agreed...humble apologies...

TNaicker Wrote:

---

> rob faux Wrote:
>
> > Don't confuse the issue TN ..............NO
> > contract is enforceable in respect of ANY
> illegal
> > activity.........not just gambling!
>
> Agreed...humble apologies...

LOL..........X(

If I may ask, what is the difference between (say) backing a horse ante-post at 33/1 (normal bread and butter meeting), and it shortens into 2/1 and wins and Lotters position - in my hypothetical scenario, what stops the bookie from saying sorry but we opened the horse at the incorrect price (33/1), so we will pay you say 5/1 odds as opposed to the 33/1. Personally I don't think there is a thing as a wrong price, as a bookie, if the market is laying 2/1 about a horse, surely nothing stops you from laying much bigger odds than the rest, or have I got it all wrong.

Conversely, the way to resolve this would be to play back to the telephone recording and listen to hear what odds operator's employee quoted, check to see what the ruling market price was at the time, and that price is the one the bet should be paid out on. If the clerk made a genuine mistake, I'm sure Lotters will understand errors do creep in from time to time, we all human after all.

Just a suggestion.

We have no details of Lotters bet?

Here is copy of my bet with Hollywood . I have not had any contact from Hollywood whatsoever . My account was credited with the winnings lastnight. After logging in this morning I noticed that there was a difference balance being shown substantially lower . The explanation on a phonecall to them was that they had shown an incorrect price on the Man/City game therefore they had adjusted my winnings . Surely Hollywood can do a better pro job than that ?


Completed Transactions
Date Reference Sport Tournament Event Market Bet type Price Bet Stake Final Price Scratching Deduction Status
2014/05/03 08:28:42 692971 RUGBY SUPER RUGBY (CHIEFS@HOME) CHIEFS vs LIONS CHIEFS (-12.5)/LIONS (+12.5) Home 0.50 16.50 33.00 140.25 - Result
2014/05/03 08:28:42 692971 SOCCER ENGLISH PREM (EVERTON@HOME) EVERTON vs MAN CITY (90 MINS) EVERTON/MAN CITY Away 2.50 123.75 49.50 140.25 - Result

The down load from bet radar came through with the wrong price 5/2 instead of 15/20

Hi Clanners and Lotters. This is the clear explanation I received from our head of sports betting.

The download came thru’ with the incorrect price on the Everton vs Man City game. The correct price should have been 15/20 but was updated at 5/2
Lotters took a double Chiefs -12.5 at 5/10 and Man City at 5/2
The double bet was 140.20/33
He took the bet at 08.28hrs

The bet was adjusted giving Lotters a double of Chiefs at 5/10 and Man City at 8/10 = 17/10 for his R33
New bet 56/33
Adjustment to his account - R84.20

The screen shot below shows the betting log as it came through onto our system from our betting supplier BetRadar. As you can see there is no way we could have adjusted the price to two different prices at the exact same time (08:17). This error was like this for 7 minutes before it was corrected.



We agree with what Lotters said, as we should have informed him of the change. I will have someone contact him this evening or tomorrow morning to run through the explanation again.

We have always believed in doing what's fair, and we hate when we have to implement our Terms and Conditions. But the price was drastically incorrect (0.75 vs 2.5) and we are well in our right to pay out the correct price.

We have our developers working on this issue, to make sure that it does not happen again, and our team will continue to monitor it as they did here. There were 4 other accounts who also had their bets adjusted to the correct price.

Piss a customer off for a paltry sum when the fault had nothing to do with him,
irrespective of what caused it ??? Classic marketing (td)