Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Man denied £1.7m payout by Betfred takes fight to High Court


Recommended Posts

Just now, ghost22 said:

yes , but who is at fault ? is it fred or playtech ? if they offered half a million now he could buy a nice house somewhere and retire , all freds problems would go away . also is anybody who played that game that night and lost cash entitled to a refund ?  i can see a class action lawsuit on the horizon .....

For this case, Andy only has an agreement with BetFred, not with Playtech. There could be a legal battle afterwards between BetFred and PlayTech, especially if it comes down to an insurance claim.

By the way, I’m not defending BetFred, it just seems the most likely outcome to me. And I completely agree that it would have been better for all parties to offer £0.5m. I think deep down Andy knew something wasn’t right (although not his fault this bug occurred) and he would’ve accepted. After all, we’ve all had a lucky run on these games before, although to repeatedly hit the jackpot time and time again? It’s only happened to me when I’ve eaten cheese before bedtime....

I suppose one good thing has come out of all this, the software on BetFred seems unreliable so steer clear!

Oh, and that’s a very interesting point about the class action lawsuit. We’ve seen a software bug that made the game repeatedly pay out big wins. So what other software bugs are there? I’ve had terrible runs on games before, was I just unlucky or was there a software bug that meant it was impossible to win? That sort of information would never be made public but this case really has the potential to open a can of worms....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It’s certainly not the first time and not just on gaming wins... Just ask Barney Curley... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/sport/racing/the-great-racing-swindle-2368664.html%3f

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, BlindHaze said:

For this case, Andy only has an agreement with BetFred, not with Playtech. There could be a legal battle afterwards between BetFred and PlayTech, especially if it comes down to an insurance claim.

By the way, I’m not defending BetFred, it just seems the most likely outcome to me. And I completely agree that it would have been better for all parties to offer £0.5m. I think deep down Andy knew something wasn’t right (although not his fault this bug occurred) and he would’ve accepted. After all, we’ve all had a lucky run on these games before, although to repeatedly hit the jackpot time and time again? It’s only happened to me when I’ve eaten cheese before bedtime....

I suppose one good thing has come out of all this, the software on BetFred seems unreliable so steer clear!

Oh, and that’s a very interesting point about the class action lawsuit. We’ve seen a software bug that made the game repeatedly pay out big wins. So what other software bugs are there? I’ve had terrible runs on games before, was I just unlucky or was there a software bug that meant it was impossible to win? That sort of information would never be made public but this case really has the potential to open a can of worms....

very good points mate , if andy had lost say 50  grand that night and logged out i very much  doubt they would have returned his  cash , hes got a chance here i think although im no queens council 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StopandStep said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8847861/Gambler-refused-1-7m-blackjack-payout-Betfred-500m-glitch.html 

They now go in to more detail about what happened, the bonus cards weren't reseting so he was hitting 7000/1 odds more and more.

some great comments in the mail  🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bookie's lawyer Richard Osborne argued a 'pays and plays' clause means winnings are void if a machine malfunctions.

Before explaining the rules, Mr Osborne asked the judge an 'impertinent question*. I wonder if you're familiar with blackjack?'

Mrs Justice Alison Foster, chuckled and replied: 'If I were, would I admit it?'
 
 
will mrs foster play hardball with mr  done ? ( who incidentally is a billionaire ) 😊 
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the law was they do not have to pay out which i completely do not agree with but he may not get the full amount so if i was him i would be careful to what he refuses and if he loses in court they may not pay out a thing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Betfred T&C will definitely cover them against catastrophic technological failures.

Otherwise all bookies/casinos would potentially all be one bet away from bankruptcy in the event of an issue like this. He should have accepted the payoff; now Betfred has received the bad publicity the damage to them is done.

Betfair did not follow their own T&C to get out of the Voler La Vedette void in-running 23M in running bets debacle. Although they did pay users off for signing NDA's.

I do agree with the comment about players losing money as a result of glitches and getting no recompense.

Edited by Stormy
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2020 at 9:55 AM, StopandStep said:

That's interesting that they offered him 30k, then 60k. I'm not familiar with that game, is it possible to win that much money from it?

I seem to remember this, or a similar article, where it was abundantly clear that for the stake the punter was playing that value could not be won. I looked at one linked story and it didn't give any more details, or not particularly more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2020 at 10:08 AM, ghost22 said:

i think the fact they offered him 60 grand is in his favour , why would betfred offer it if they know they are in the right ? , theres something odd going on here .

It will cost them a lot in legal fees to defend it. Money they almost certainly would never see even if the judge gave a cost ruling in their favour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but there is no way Betfred offer half a ruddy million. Will set precedent for every software fault. And players playing that night don't need a refund for the glitch because it could only improve their chances of winning, not harm. If he had stayed for another 10 hours Betfred could theoretically owe him the GDP of a small country. Bookies are rotten to the core but on this occasion its a painfully obvious software fault and they shoudn't have to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, DaveM said:

Sorry but there is no way Betfred offer half a ruddy million. Will set precedent for every software fault. And players playing that night don't need a refund for the glitch because it could only improve their chances of winning, not harm. If he had stayed for another 10 hours Betfred could theoretically owe him the GDP of a small country. Bookies are rotten to the core but on this occasion its a painfully obvious software fault and they shoudn't have to pay.

no offence man but your assuming the glitch made it easier to win for everybody , that cant be the case as they would be down tens of millions , when that game was spewing its guts it must have been altering the rtp for everybody else , more than likely  on the lower end of the scale for us mere mortals 

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Stormy said:

Betfred T&C will definitely cover them against catastrophic technological failures.

Otherwise all bookies/casinos would potentially all be one bet away from bankruptcy in the event of an issue like this. He should have accepted the payoff; now Betfred has received the bad publicity the damage to them is done.

Betfair did not follow their own T&C to get out of the Voler La Vedette void in-running 23M in running bets debacle. Although they did pay users off for signing NDA's.

I do agree with the comment about players losing money as a result of glitches and getting no recompense.

i remember it well , i was on voler pre race on the machine , i think i got payed as i hadnt bet in running , some freddy fat fingers bashing the wrong button or maybe just thick 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, DaveM said:

It will cost them a lot in legal fees to defend it. Money they almost certainly would never see even if the judge gave a cost ruling in their favour.

60 k wont go far in the high court , fred will be sorry he went down this road , even if he wins the guy can go bankrupt for about 500 quid , you cant take knickers off a bare arse 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Senna said:

makes a nice change that it wasn't a online streamer, they win thousands daily 🙂

leave chip alone :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy will lose. Quite clearly a software problem and they’re covered in T&C to void the game.

My opinion of course.

Just shows though that everything is skewed in favour of the bookie.

I remember hearing of a bloke on a FOBT who was in a free spins feature and was certain to get the jackpot but the machine crashed and had to be reset, he got nadda.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...