Meanwhile, in Southend.....

[BlindHaze]

This is in my local rag - what’s your take on it?

https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/17871050.punter-loses-25k-payout/

[TheKingInTheNorth]

Actually side with William Hill here, it’s a computer error and the rules are clear that the 50k prize pool will be split between all winners so by the rules he’s only entitled to a 1/19 share of the 50k which Hills have offered. It’s also a free comp so £2k for nothing is still better than a kick in the tits!

Think of it this way, if you pop into Curry’s to buy a new fancy TV that costs £1999.99 and note to your initial delight that the shelf price shows £199.99 due to a printing error, contrary to urban myth Curry’s DO NOT have to sell it to you for £199.99 as in law this is just an offer to sell at that price and the seller is fully entitled to correct that error at the point of sale by advising the actual selling price of £1999.99.

For me whilst not identical situations similar rules will apply and I’ll bet a lot of money that the Ts&Cs of this competition will have all the bases covered.

Hills won’t move on this as if the give this guy £25k they will have to give the other 18 the same costing them £475k!

Its a sickner for the guy but he’d be better accepting the IBAS decision if it goes against him as taking Hills to court will just leave him with a large lawyer bill that costs more than he won. 

[DaveM]

Definitely not owed it. Obviously disappointing but it's not as if they are welching on some of the selections in an acca because he placed the bet 3 seconds after the match started.

[Faz42]

On 8/31/2019 at 9:44 AM, TheKingInTheNorth said:

Actually side with William Hill here, it’s a computer error and the rules are clear that the 50k prize pool will be split between all winners so by the rules he’s only entitled to a 1/19 share of the 50k which Hills have offered. It’s also a free comp so £2k for nothing is still better than a kick in the tits!

Think of it this way, if you pop into Curry’s to buy a new fancy TV that costs £1999.99 and note to your initial delight that the shelf price shows £199.99 due to a printing error, contrary to urban myth Curry’s DO NOT have to sell it to you for £199.99 as in law this is just an offer to sell at that price and the seller is fully entitled to correct that error at the point of sale by advising the actual selling price of £1999.99.

For me whilst not identical situations similar rules will apply and I’ll bet a lot of money that the Ts&Cs of this competition will have all the bases covered.

Hills won’t move on this as if the give this guy £25k they will have to give the other 18 the same costing them £475k!

Its a sickner for the guy but he’d be better accepting the IBAS decision if it goes against him as taking Hills to court will just leave him with a large lawyer bill that costs more than he won. 

That's not the reality of "palpable error" bets though.  It would be more akin to walking into Curry's and buying a tv for £199 only to be told when it comes for delivery they had priced it wrong so your not getting the tv you wanted and instead they will give you a DVD player or something.

 

As for this case it's been a computer error, the problem is that they have given him a reciept after he went in to collect his winnings that says they will pay him 25k because he was one of 2 winners.  Now he could go to court with that and argue his case hoping that the judge sides with him as he has proof that hills have agreed to pay him 25k and hills could argue it was a computer error but they would have to prove this and allow access to the other winners.  

 

The easy answer would of been for hills to apologise and give him a £1000 free bet because let's be honest the chance of him turning it into anything significant would be very small and it would of been good press.