Betfair Confiscated 2000£

visavoyage

Dormant account
I deposited 50£ in Betfair, got the 50£ bonus, turned it into 2000£, withdrew 1000£, turned the remaining 1000£ into 2000£, tried to withdraw and had my winnings confiscated and my account blocked. How can a casino as big as that do that?
 

incrediblestuff

SearchingForTheHolyGrail!
webmeister
CAG
well the reasons can vary, first thing to do would be contacting the support wouldnt you agree?
i take it you have not done this, as you wouldnt be asking how then?
if you did, have they reacted, e.g given a reason?
if you didnt i would ask them asap, in fact right now.
and then if theres no solution come back here:)
cheers

if your blocked then here:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
The OP has gone through all the normal channels, even went so far as to Pitch-A-Bitch.

Initially the Betfair rep said it was a case of player fraud but that they couldn't discuss the case in detail because player details are private. I asked if they'd discuss it if they received explicit permission from the OP allowing us to see those details. The rep said 'yes'.

The OP wrote his letter, the rep said the details would be forthcoming, but when it came time to actually do so they clammed up:
Due to money laundering potential, fraud and other criminal influences, these teams [Fraud and Risk] are not allowed to discuss the cases with other departments within the company, let alone send details to third parties.
In other words they won't discuss the details of this or any other case. They simply say that the player was at fault, that their actions are proper and that we should take their word for it.

Needless to say the "no details" policy is their decision to take if they want to go that way. On the other hand players need to know this because it means they have no recourse if there is a disagreement, such as in the OP's case here. To that end I have posted an alert in the Warnings forum regarding this: Betfair will not discuss player issues.
 
Last edited:

incrediblestuff

SearchingForTheHolyGrail!
webmeister
CAG
wow that smells like rogue nomination to me right?
visavoyage, im truly sorry for you then, but at least you made a nice profit of your 50 right?
could be waaaay worse, try to look on the bright side...
i know its hard:)
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
wow that smells like rogue nomination to me right?
Unlikely. The Rogue list is for casinos that "are guilty of gross customer negligence bordering on the criminal." We have no reason to believe that is applicable to Betfair so no, no Rogue listing.
 

incrediblestuff

SearchingForTheHolyGrail!
webmeister
CAG
understood, but a non recommended would be in order?
e.g if you ever get issues with this casino, noone can help you..
i would say that is more then fair, because unwillingness to discuss anything openly is to me shady at the least.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
That's not my call to make but again, I think not.

A casino gets listed as Not Recommended "because of substandard customer service, poor support, bad bonus terms, and questionable business practices."

Again, there is no evidence that these conditions exist in this case or any other Betfair related issue, though I understand how the "will not discuss details" policy might appear to meet the NR criteria in some people's eyes.

Frankly there is no evidence of wrong-doing in Betfair's current activities. All we have is the "no details" policy which I think players need to be aware of, hence the posting in the Warnings section. For now that's as far as it goes.
 

incrediblestuff

SearchingForTheHolyGrail!
webmeister
CAG
very nice that you are carefull with the branding of certain hard to loose casinomeister titles ^^
and indeed for now a warning might be enough, although i think this could be the next interesting discussion, as i personally find their statement as to WHY not commenting, especially after first saying "if the o.p agrees", they would, is to me a questionable business practice :)
 

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
Since there is nothing more to be done with regard to a PAB, maybe the OP can shed more details on this issue. May not necessarily help his case but potential players at Betfair may wish to know.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
The OP should be warned that if they do not present the issue fairly I will be compelled to state the casino's side of it as a matter of fairness.

I'm not saying the OP shouldn't post -- perhaps they should! -- but I won't let this turn into a "beat up the casino" situation where their side of it goes unheard.
 

Jasminebed

Grumpy old gal
This may not be helpful to the OP, but Betfair offers a dispute resolution
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


I'm unsure whether the OP played casino, sportsbook or poker, but I know I would make every effort to recover my winnings.

Also, the terms of the bonus the player took are important I think.

I hope the OP returns to post further. Did the casino request documents, and were they provided?

That the bonus was completed and a withdrawal made of only half the winnings doesn't strike me as the typical fraudster. If the withdrawal of part of the winnings was followed by a "double-up" of the remaining sum, this might be considered advantage play to work around betting restrictions on the bonus. The OP states in his profile he is a problem gambler. Probably not the admission of most frauds. He also provided Betfair with permission to discuss his case, an openess I don't think is typical of the average fraud.

Fraud or suspected fraud is a serious accusation to make against a player, and is often lumped together with patterns of irregular play or some form of "bonus abuse".
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
From their Dispute Resolution page:
Maltese based products - The Lotteries and Gaming Authority:

Alternatively, if you have made a complaint to Betfair in relation to one of our Maltese licensed products (for example, Poker, Casino, Games, or Multiples betting) and you feel that Betfair's final decision about your dispute was not dealt with satisfactorily, you can raise any unresolved dispute with the Maltese Lotteries and Gaming Authority by emailing: complaints@lga.org.mt.
 

visavoyage

Dormant account
From their Dispute Resolution page:
Thanks, that seems to be a good idea. Do you know anyone else I can complain to about this issue? I know there are casinos that have a F U Clause, but what about Betfair? I fulfilled the requirements playing only blackjack, which wasnt restricted from the bonus, I sent them the documents they requested, they processed my withdrawal and when I went to gamble more and make another withdrawal they suspended my account. All I can say is WTF?
 

lee_bumble

Dormant account
Thanks, that seems to be a good idea. Do you know anyone else I can complain to about this issue? I know there are casinos that have a F U Clause, but what about Betfair? I fulfilled the requirements playing only blackjack, which wasnt restricted from the bonus, I sent them the documents they requested, they processed my withdrawal and when I went to gamble more and make another withdrawal they suspended my account. All I can say is WTF?
What I can gather from Maxd is Betfair are acusing you of fraud. If the bonus you took was for black jack only and you ONLY played black jack then there shouldnt be a problem there. I would be really intrested to know if they paid you the first installment of £1000.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Do you know anyone else I can complain to about this issue?
Do you mean complain as in post your issue for others to see? Any gambling forum would seem fair game, no?

Or do you mean complain as in present your case before an impartial body that will investigate, evaluate and render a binding judgment? Umm, no, that's kind of the point: it's Betfair's Dispute Resolution, or Malta, or an appeal to the gods. Take your pick.

What I can gather from Maxd is Betfair are acusing you of fraud.
Quite so. The accusation could not be verified.
 
Last edited:

incrediblestuff

SearchingForTheHolyGrail!
webmeister
CAG
Do you mean complain as in post your issue for others to see? Any gambling forum would seem fair game, no?

Or do you mean complain as in present your case before an impartial body that will investigate, evaluate and render a binding judgment? Umm, no, that's kind of the point: it's Betfair's Dispute Resolution, or Malta, or an appeal to the gods. Take your pick.



Quite so. The accusation could not be verified.
that upper sentence ^^
sounds so .... perry mason>.
:thumbsup:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
CAG
MM
Thanks, that seems to be a good idea. Do you know anyone else I can complain to about this issue? I know there are casinos that have a F U Clause, but what about Betfair? I fulfilled the requirements playing only blackjack, which wasnt restricted from the bonus, I sent them the documents they requested, they processed my withdrawal and when I went to gamble more and make another withdrawal they suspended my account. All I can say is WTF?
As you are British, and Betfair is based in the EU, you can try complaining to Trading Standards as well as Malta.

Under the new gambling act, you can now also take Betfair to the small claims court, where they will have to demonstrate to the judge that on the balance of probabilities you are a fraudster. Provided you can show the judge that you did NOT breach any terms and conditions, and that you did not misrepresent your details when registering (fraud), you will most likely win. Betfair would then have a CCJ registered against them, a HUGE embarrassment, and it could cost you as little as £100 because the claim falls under the "small claims court" limit, currently £5500 I believe.

Betfair are correct about being unable to disclose details to a third party, BUT are merely required to receive permission from you, and once they have done this, they can no longer hide behind this law.

It looks like the casino said that they would discuss details with Max upon receiving your permission, but fully expected that this would NOT be forthcoming, because they had you down as a fraudster who would "do a runner" when asked to justify their case. The fact that you DID give permission caught them on the hop, and they had to think on their feet and "blow off" Max with a different excuse. Clearly FROM THE START they had NO intention of cooperating with Max, but strung him along at first by saying they would, but only if they received your permission as required under the data protection act.

Max should be annoyed that Betfair were not honest with him straight away, but wasted his time by saying they merely needed permission from the player.

I would, myself, consider this "bad business practice", since it is dishonesty, even if minor.

I am personally shocked that this would happen with Betfair, MOST other big and reputable industry players are more than happy to recognise Max and the PAB service as a legitimate, though informal, dispute resolution service.

Surely, having Max rule against them is less of a risk than having a CCJ registered against them in a UK small claims court, or a complaint to Malta determined against them.

This kind of attitude from operators is what does the most damage of all in the industry, as it shows players that operators are a law unto themselves, and can confiscate players' money on a whim, and make it almost impossible for the player to challenge the decision. In many cases, things like this turn out to be nothing more than administrative errors, like the pensioner who received a gas bill for over £20,000, despite not having any gas at all. Even WITH the backing of all sorts of third party dispute resolution services, the poor pensioner was hounded for MONTHS by a big company that just didn't listen, nor see the "bleedin' obvious". This kind of thing happens time and time again, and ANY company that is so arrogant as to say "we cannot POSSIBLY be wrong", again is exhibiting "bad business practice", since good practice is to recognise that perfection DOES NOT EXIST, and that mistakes ARE made, and companies should listen, and be prepared to accept this, apologise if necessary, and change procedures to make such mistakes harder in the future.

Companies who are not prepared to do this deserve all the bad PR they get, it is the ONLY way to persuade their execs to extract their heads from their arses and get with the real world.
 

maxd

Complaints (PAB) Manager
Staff member
Betfair are correct about being unable to disclose details to a third party, BUT are merely required to receive permission from you, and once they have done this, they can no longer hide behind this law.
I should point out that 99 times out of 100 the "details" that need to be shared in order to resolve a case are not the same "details" covered by the data protection laws. I've read those laws and they're quite specific about what they cover, mostly financial information and the like.

Almost without exception I don't need that kind of info from the casino, nor do I want it. I only need basic stuff, a statement of the play patterns involved or how many times the player has re-registered at the casino and so forth. It's usually mundane stuff, not DP-related at all.

Bottom line is that if a casino __wants__ to resolve issues with us they'll almost always be able to find a way that keeps them on the good side of the law. If not then the waiver from the player should allow us to proceed.

However if the casino __does_not__ want to work with us then the DP laws are a very convenient shelter to hide behind. And that is how they are often used. Usually it comes at the end of a string of sour experiences between me and the casino, in other words it's the reason they've pulled out of the legal-beagle hat for closing the door.

I'd like to add a little story here that illustrates a bit how the "Data Protection" thing gets used. A while back, well over a year, we started getting a string of issues against a particular casino. Every one we took to them was a struggle. They gave every excuse they could think of, fought it every step of the way, including of course the old "data protection" story.

Finally there was talk of posting a Warning, or maybe we had posted a Warning, I can't remember. Anyway they suddenly decided to cooperate. One of the excuses they gave for the problems that had occurred to date was that they had not received the emails I said I had sent to them, and resent for their convenience. My contact was pissed off at that point and got his assistant to respond to me for a few days.

Turns out all our communications to them were routinely, and intentionally, filtered off into a folder called "Complainers and Trouble-Makers" which the assistant happily told me they seldom looked at. "Why should we?" he asked. I thought that said a lot about what they thought of us and our efforts. And it also said a lot about how convenient the "data protection" flag was to wave when what they really meant was "piss off!"
 
Top