Ladbrokes

[huwa]

One more thing - I have to admit that I didn't have much faith at all in the GRA. They surprised me though and I probably wouldn't have been paid (without court action) without them.

 

[jetset]

I'm glad you (eventually) prevailed; Ladbrokes policy of not communicating certainly backfired when they neglected to comply with the GRA order to contact you, and it's good to see even a player-unfriendly outfit like the GRA getting off its butt to make things happen (ultimately).

Ladbrokes' reputation certainly seems to have declined, and this sort of unprofessional behaviour underlines why.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I'm glad you (eventually) prevailed; Ladbrokes policy of not communicating certainly backfired when they neglected to comply with the GRA order to contact you, and it's good to see even a player-unfriendly outfit like the GRA getting off its butt to make things happen (ultimately).

Ladbrokes' reputation certainly seems to have declined, and this sort of unprofessional behaviour underlines why.

Their reasoning just makes things even worse for them. They cut off a high roller's ability to place bets, and then they accuse them of depositing without the intention of making bets. This was not even a dispute over the validity of play, but a straight forward attempt to confiscate the whole of a £5K deposit.

A big name like Ladbrokes should really be able to handle this kind of action. A bloke stood on a wooden crate with a blackboard and chalk at the racecourse can even handle this level of action

I always thought exchanges took the risk away from the operator, and that the prices would be determined by trading between punters and layers. Maybe they just don't want high rollers on the exchanges as they can dominate and distort the market, but in this case why not set limits from the start so that high rollers know that if they want to bet high, they go elsewhere.

This would have been a certain court victory for the OP. The best Ladbrokes could do would be to prove that they incurred extra costs due to the OP. They would still not be able to claim an arbitrary £4800, but would be allowed to deduct actual costs from the settlement. However, as they had blocked the customer from placing bets with the money deposited, they would probably not even get these costs, as they had caused them by deciding to no longer provide the service to the customer.