Betfair Bonus Fiasco

[DiamondGeezer]

Last week I received a letter from "Banco de Portugal" wich regulates bank activity, saying that my bank had no action and no responsability on the funds taken by betfair. So I suppose 2 things:

1- Betfair just charged it back and legally they can (?)
2- There´s something strange behind this... I mean really strange (€)

Well I'm voting for option 2.

The wheels of justice turn slowly it seems...

 

[Nifty29]

I find this Betfair fiasco rather 'embarrassing' for the online gambling community. And the fact that no authority or regulator or licensing agency has taken Betfair to task for screwing players over is nothing less than an outrage.

I agree. It's abhorrent.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Last week I received a letter from "Banco de Portugal" wich regulates bank activity, saying that my bank had no action and no responsability on the funds taken by betfair. So I suppose 2 things:

1- Betfair just charged it back and legally they can (?)
2- There´s something strange behind this... I mean really strange (€)

So, they are saying that if a company has your bank details, they can "charge back" a sum they have paid into your account without fear of reprisals.

This is obviously a loophole in the law, and probably one that has not been used in this way before.

Maybe you should try to get the media interested in this position on the matter stated by the regulator, and how this is a loophole in the current rules that can be misused by any company that has your bank details, and the customer has no right to expect to be asked for permission.

This story could make the general public worried about the wider implications of this, and thus demand a tightening of the rules.

Maybe Betfair knew that they could do this, and get away with it. They also took 8 months to return the deposit, and since their decision was "final", why did they NEED a further 8 months unless they intended to act in "bad faith" and keep as many DEPOSITS as they could, as well as confiscate winnings.

In hindsight, you could have beat them at their own game by moving the 32K out of the account as soon as it hit, then they couldn't just have taken it, but would have had to present a case for it's recovery, even take YOU to court to prove that you didn't win it. They could easily have lost the case, since you didn't break any of the terms, and they paid other players in the same position, so were trying to selectively not pay players, rather than applying the rules fairly to all.

It is possible that many players have given up the attempt at taking them to court once they had found out how much it would cost, and how hard it might be to win the case. If they lost, they would face paying the costs of Betfair on top of their own, and this might have been enough to scare them off.

Betfair now have far more to worry about than this issue, as their shares are in "freefall" because of poor performance since floating on the stock exchange. I expect ANY negative publicity over this will encourage them to look again at this issue, and this would include a media storm over them arbitrarily dipping into your bank and taking the 32K that you won WITHIN the terms and conditions.

 

[Joaopc56]

vinylweatherman your acknowledge is really impressive. Unfornately I don´t live in UK, my options here in Portugal are very limited. I tried to dispute the money and the case with my bank but I failed to win as you can see. For "Banco de Portugal" isn´t even a question to debate, so I don´t think I have much options left. And the money it would cost...

Thank you again for your highly informative posts!

 

[LinkinFart]

Joaopc56, dont give up so easily. There are still things You could do. As VWM proposed, talk to media. There must be some "Consumer protection" related TV show which would just love to get their teeth into this story.

Banks dont like bad publicity as much as any other business, if not more. Its the trust related business and knowing that someone can cancel transaction after its been processed is not comforting, not to common people and specially not businesses.

Dont give up, its not Your fault they made a bad promo and last time I checked Portugal was developed country. Contacting local media doesnt cost a thing and I`m certain there is some government institution that is responsible for dealing with issues such as yours.

 

[-Wendy-]

Now the CEO is going to step down...

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[vinylweatherman]

vinylweatherman your acknowledge is really impressive. Unfornately I don´t live in UK, my options here in Portugal are very limited. I tried to dispute the money and the case with my bank but I failed to win as you can see. For "Banco de Portugal" isn´t even a question to debate, so I don´t think I have much options left. And the money it would cost...

Thank you again for your highly informative posts!

Portugal is still a member of the EU, so although the UK system might be better, as such a complaint would then go to the Financial Ombudsman, whereas yours was thwarted by "Banco de Portugal", there may be something in EU directives that would require your government to change the rules to ensure cases like yours are covered.

The media is your best bet, since this is how many of the UK protection rules have come about. Recent media campaigns have caused the shutting down of many banking "scams" that have been used by UK banks to "rip-off" customers. Just recently, and after media coverage, a scam that Ryanair have been using has just been shut down (the one where they charge "card fees" unless you have some obscure brand of card, and only have this fee shown right at the end of a lengthy process).

The fact that you, and ordinary citizen, lost €32K because there is nothing to stop an offshore processor from taking this amount from your bank without you even knowing about it, let alone having to give permission.

It is possible, as has often happened here, the bank will try to "buy you off" in order to stop the bad publicity. Here, this has usually been done by giving the customer all or part of the disputed amount as a "goodwill gesture", but not accepting liabilty for having done anything wrong (which just covers their ass against "copycat" claims).

The only other route would be to sue the bank in court, which could be expensive, and there would be no guarantee of winning.

Betfair have not been afraid of the bad publicity, but it seems they have other things to worry about. It is hard to tell whether the bad publicity over this "bonus fiasco" is what has lead to them losing players and revenue, but they are not admitting it, putting the decline down to other factors such as the global recession, competition, etc.

 

[luarod]

I have to agree with the previous posts, media is best way to fight for this. Your bank probably won´t want any trouble and will try to look good, after all their business model relies on values like stability, respect, responsability, etc (even though we know that´s no the case )

I sincerely wish you good luck.

 

[threescatters]

they are going from bad to worse

 

[Mousey]

How low the mighty have fallen. Not partnered with Virtual are they?

 

[Pulver]

3.1 million dollar slowpay

 

[pinkfloyd]

its amazing , from such an innovative company that was winning awards and reshaping the gaming industy sponsoring races and such , they where making money hand over fist just from their betting exchange , then like most businesses banks and such , people from australia will know ziggy from telstra they get people and managers whos " intensive based bonus paypackets " take the company down while their paypackets rise to the point of a golden handshake while leaving the company fighting for survival.

banks do it .. new manager comes in says ok our bank made 1 billion last year i have to make 1.6 billion to get my golden handshake ... ok lets raise atm fees by 10c , add another 2 or 3 bank fees and close 7 branches and hire 20 3rd world country call staff and sack 100 local staff .... customers are pissed off but the banks profits rise , guy gets golden handhsake and it starts again .


the tragic work besides the the bonus fiasco done by the current or quitting managers can be seen , their paypackets rose phenomenally while ..... they introduced a 20 % tax for permanent winners above their normal 5% , they introduced fees for inactive accounts , they introduced fees for to many data hits on the betfair exchange server mainly for people using betting software that betfair it self offers and now they are talking about hitting long term winners on the exchange ( they claim it will only affect 5% of betfair punters ) with a 60 % fee on their winnings ?

now betfair customers are pissed off , their stocks are plummeting and the 2 turkeys who introduced this get a 400 % payrise cause the company made slightly more profit its a joke .

 

[pinkfloyd]

my friend actually made me laugh on this

to anyone who doesnt know you can request any market on the exchange ie horse race , chess match , politics , big brother tv show etc

my friend said would they let me put up this market on betfair ?


what will come of betfair's upper management?
back lay
arrest by authorities on fraud charges 1.32 - 1.39
lynched by shareholders or irate customers 1.27 - 1.39
no action , no difference-- 1.35 - 1.42

 

[jetset]

This really is a shocker, and a further indication that Betfair is not the fair-minded and dynamic innovator that most of us thought it was.

I'm trying to get my mind around why they would pay such a huge amount to a processor, knowing that said processor would then eke out the payments to the player on grounds of some unspecified law. There must have been other alternatives if they really had the player's welfare front-of-mind.

It's alarming that the company is so arrogant that it simply refuses to communicate (as was the case in parts of this thread) and appears to think it can simply sweep these issues to one side without fear of consequences.

 

[Mousey]

This really is a shocker, and a further indication that Betfair is not the fair-minded and dynamic innovator that most of us thought it was.

I'm trying to get my mind around why they would pay such a huge amount to a processor, knowing that said processor would then eke out the payments to the player on grounds of some unspecified law. There must have been other alternatives if they really had the player's welfare front-of-mind.

It's alarming that the company is so arrogant that it simply refuses to communicate (as was the case in parts of this thread) and appears to think it can simply sweep these issues to one side without fear of consequences.

I find that rather.... strange, too. Unless they didn't pay FULL amount to processor. Let's say they pay less than the 3.1 mil to processor, but the processor gets to make beaucoup interest holding such money. Betfair profits, processor makes money, meanwhile the player gets measly payouts (comparatively). Even then... What if that processor goes bust? walks away with the money? disappears into the night? If the player (heaven forbid) should pass away have arrangements been made to pay beneficiary or will the processor just keep it? We're talking a couple of years to get paid. A lot can happen in a couple of years.

Bizarre situation....

 

[jetset]

Mousey raises a host of really relevant points here, especially (imo) the questions of accrued interest, risk of the processor going bust and contingencies if the player passes on.

I'm also intrigued by what law the processor is referring to when it comes to the amount it can pay the player every week.

The complainant appears to be a sports bettor, but can you imagine how you would feel as an online casino gambler who hit a major progressive and was then faced with these sort of obstacles and stress-inducing hassles?

 

[pinkfloyd]

@jetset

moneybookers has a rolling outgoing withdraw limit as well , that goes up the more you verify , tho i think standard for most people is 15 to 40k unless your vip etc

so if a player won 70k from a casino site withdrew it to moneybookers he might only be able to withdraw 15k of that then wait for it to roll over.

so in this case i dont think betfair can be blamed , they just payed someone to their preferred processor
the processor tho should be doing everything in its power for good publicity to pay the guy in a lump sum , tho they will have that money locked away for as long as possible making interest .

tho i have to be honest if i was withdrawing 30k or more especially 3.1 mill i would be asking for an express check to be delivered to my door , with security guards and killer dogs optional extra to escort the mailman lol ... who would want to leave 3.1 mill floating in the middle of cyberspace even for 1 hour .. lol

 

[vinylweatherman]

@jetset

moneybookers has a rolling outgoing withdraw limit as well , that goes up the more you verify , tho i think standard for most people is 15 to 40k unless your vip etc

so if a player won 70k from a casino site withdrew it to moneybookers he might only be able to withdraw 15k of that then wait for it to roll over.

so in this case i dont think betfair can be blamed , they just payed someone to their preferred processor
the processor tho should be doing everything in its power for good publicity to pay the guy in a lump sum , tho they will have that money locked away for as long as possible making interest .

tho i have to be honest if i was withdrawing 30k or more especially 3.1 mill i would be asking for an express check to be delivered to my door , with security guards and killer dogs optional extra to escort the mailman lol ... who would want to leave 3.1 mill floating in the middle of cyberspace even for 1 hour .. lol

I think the OPERATOR chooses the processor in this case. The PLAYER seems to have chosen "bank wire(s)" as a withdrawal method, expecting the money to be wired in a reasonable timeframe. It is highly unusual for an operator to tell a player to deal direct with their processor; in fact it is unusual to find an operator that is even prepared to tell the player which intermediaries are being used due to "commercial in confidence" or similar excuses.

This looks like an attempt by Betfair to shift responsibilty to it's own processor, which is NOT going to be covered by the licensing conditions that apply to the sportsbook. Since this is a sports bettor, this could well be the UK Gambling Commission, as I recall this distinction coming up in discussions of the original "bonus fiasco" where the UK could not hear the complaint due to it being a "casino matter", which was covered by a different offshore license, despite the fact that the monies were confiscated from the sports purse during the withdrawal process.

The sports licensing jurisdiction may consider that Betfair failed to process this large sum "with due care" on behalf of the player, and would thus be held responsible for making good on any default by the processor, as well as for ensuring that the monies are processed without undue delay.

 

[pinkfloyd]

i thought it was betfair payed the processor > processor says 10k a week restrictions ?

so did the 3.1 million guy not withdraw to the processor , ie choose another option and betfair paid to the processor instead ?

 

[vinylweatherman]

i thought it was betfair payed the processor > processor says 10k a week restrictions ?

so did the 3.1 million guy not withdraw to the processor , ie choose another option and betfair paid to the processor instead ?

From the video, the story is that the player withdrew, and Betfair engaged a third party processor to make the transactions (which is normal). The player was to be paid by bank wire, but was THEN told that these limits applied "by law" by the processor. Despite this "law", Betfair supposedly paid the WHOLE amount to the processor, even though the processor would be taking some YEARS to forward the money to the player.

The whole thing has an aroma of bovine excrement about it, since in the "real world" no business parts with cash until it absolutely has to. This is why there are so many complaints about big businesses taking so long to pay for stuff and services ordered from their suppliers, usually smaller businesses. Delaying payments meant the big business could keep a month's extra interest on the money already spent (and goods/services received). Worse still, this meant that the big business didn't have to borrow from their overdraft to pay for goods and services they had received, but the delay often meant that the smaller businesses had to borrow the money they were waiting for, having already supplied the goods/services, and pay interest to the banks. This has even lead to some small businesses going bust because they couldn't survive having to effectively loan money to the big businesses every time they supplied anything.

Despite this, we are supposed to believe that Betfair paid the whole 3M to the processor, and forgo the benefit of being able to hang on to the money, earning interest, whilst paying the player in smaller chunks "up to the maximum allowed by law" over a couple of years.

 

[threescatters]

I think we can conclude from this betfair have gone rogue on a whole scale, not just confined to the casino. I dont think that would be harsh to say now, they deserve it.

 

[Casinomeister]

And this is one of the reasons that they're in the Rogue Pit.

https://www.casinomeister.com/casino-reviews/betfair/

They've been there for about 9 months.

Those who care...beware.

 

[Mousey]

Since I'm in the USA, I've always held it in the back of my mind that since gambling here isn't strictly legal, and with the DOJ stealing our money as often as the casinos and processors, we just have to put up with, basically, whatever online casinos/sportsbook do to us-- with our only recourse being Casinomeister and the PAB system to help if we get screwed over. But places like Betfair are licensed, 'regulated' ??? Supposedly a 'legitimate' business that has no dealings with the nasty ol' US??

And that is what bothers me the most about this enitre Betfair fiasco (including the no pays and a player's bank account being raided of thousands of dollars already paid out) -- all this serves to prove to me is that there is ZERO regulation of online gambling. ZERO. Zilch. Nada. None. Players can scream to the moon at midnight for all the good this 'regulation' does. They have ZERO recourse.

Pitch a Bitch here? Go right ahead. If the online casino/sportsbook doesn't want to listen to reason, they get rogued. But they don't give a flying rat's butt because they're 'regulated' and 'licensed' and can (as illustrated in this monster thread) do whatever the hell they want. It used to be Virtual and similar POS joints were pretty much all we had to worry about, and, supposedly, if we kept our noses clean, played straight with the big boys, we were ok. If something went wrong, fine, it would be straightened out.

I don't see that as a reality any longer.....

/rant

 

[vinylweatherman]

Since I'm in the USA, I've always held it in the back of my mind that since gambling here isn't strictly legal, and with the DOJ stealing our money as often as the casinos and processors, we just have to put up with, basically, whatever online casinos/sportsbook do to us-- with our only recourse being Casinomeister and the PAB system to help if we get screwed over. But places like Betfair are licensed, 'regulated' ??? Supposedly a 'legitimate' business that has no dealings with the nasty ol' US??

And that is what bothers me the most about this enitre Betfair fiasco (including the no pays and a player's bank account being raided of thousands of dollars already paid out) -- all this serves to prove to me is that there is ZERO regulation of online gambling. ZERO. Zilch. Nada. None. Players can scream to the moon at midnight for all the good this 'regulation' does. They have ZERO recourse.

Pitch a Bitch here? Go right ahead. If the online casino/sportsbook doesn't want to listen to reason, they get rogued. But they don't give a flying rat's butt because they're 'regulated' and 'licensed' and can (as illustrated in this monster thread) do whatever the hell they want. It used to be Virtual and similar POS joints were pretty much all we had to worry about, and, supposedly, if we kept our noses clean, played straight with the big boys, we were ok. If something went wrong, fine, it would be straightened out.

I don't see that as a reality any longer.....

/rant

They WILL pay for this, as the more they keep this kind of behaviour up, the harder it will be for them to bring in further revenue. They could eventually go bust, or get taken over by a stronger company. Those responsible could well find themselves on the dole looking for another job.

 

[jetset]

From the video, the story is that the player withdrew, and Betfair engaged a third party processor to make the transactions (which is normal). The player was to be paid by bank wire, but was THEN told that these limits applied "by law" by the processor. Despite this "law", Betfair supposedly paid the WHOLE amount to the processor, even though the processor would be taking some YEARS to forward the money to the player.

The whole thing has an aroma of bovine excrement about it, since in the "real world" no business parts with cash until it absolutely has to. This is why there are so many complaints about big businesses taking so long to pay for stuff and services ordered from their suppliers, usually smaller businesses. Delaying payments meant the big business could keep a month's extra interest on the money already spent (and goods/services received). Worse still, this meant that the big business didn't have to borrow from their overdraft to pay for goods and services they had received, but the delay often meant that the smaller businesses had to borrow the money they were waiting for, having already supplied the goods/services, and pay interest to the banks. This has even lead to some small businesses going bust because they couldn't survive having to effectively loan money to the big businesses every time they supplied anything.

Despite this, we are supposed to believe that Betfair paid the whole 3M to the processor, and forgo the benefit of being able to hang on to the money, earning interest, whilst paying the player in smaller chunks "up to the maximum allowed by law" over a couple of years.

I think it is also worth noting that a player does not sign up to a processor - he or she signs up with the gambling company, in many cases relying on the reliability and reputation of that company to be assured of timeous and efficient payment.

Betfair has apparently ducked that obligation and is simply waving the player off to a processor with a possibly questionable ability to pay the player what he is owed within a reasonable timeframe.