Janus Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 A guy that potentially won over 7 million pounds at Ladbrokes with an accumulator bet (snow at xmas) has been offered less than £32. They have wriggled out like the insurance companies do, even though the error was on their side. http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE60734X20100108 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 They took the bet, they should pay up.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 A guy that potentially won over 7 million pounds at Ladbrokes with an accumulator bet (snow at xmas) has been offered less than £32. They have wriggled out like the insurance companies do, even though the error was on their side. http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE60734X20100108 I remember reading somewhere that the bookmakers have no legal obligation to pay a bet out. I bet the bloke is gutted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janus Posted January 9, 2010 Author Share Posted January 9, 2010 I remember reading somewhere that the bookmakers have no legal obligation to pay a bet out. I bet the bloke is gutted. Yes he actually said he felt gutted. As Ladbrokes made the error, you would have thought they would have given him something half decent to save face & avoid bad publicity. Now, they face a legal battle (and bad publicity) and the outcome of that may set a legal precedent. How silly was their £32 decission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matsalleh Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Best of luck,this is what their website rules state. https://www.ladbrokes.com/lb_portal/en/help/rules/genrules.html When the same selection is taken to win more than one event, the only bets available at the current odds are Singles. When we offer betting opportunities from the same event, these cannot be combined in accumulative bets where the outcome is related. The only exception to this is where special fixed prices are made available, for example; a Scorecast on a football match. It seems to be their error,but even so there is usually a limit on bets of 100,000/1which is better than £32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 does this just go to prove that gambling's a mug's game, or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 its the same all over, THEY want OUR money but dont like giving it back, same with banks, utility companies, councils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TylerXIII Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 I'm sure there's a few lawyer firms who'd love to get a phone call from the potential millionaire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ousetunes Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 I take it then that if the guy had parted with £7M to place the bet - and it was discovered that Ladbrokes should not have accepted it - he would have been entitled to his money back? Who was working behind the counter? Messrs Brown and Darling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iansheff Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Its easily sorted if they don't pay out or reach a compromise, all gamblers should boycott Ladbrokes there are plenty of other companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.