1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dismiss Notice
  3. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Betfair Confiscated 2000£

Discussion in 'Casino Complaints - Bonus Issues' started by visavoyage, Mar 23, 2010.

    Mar 23, 2010
  1. visavoyage

    visavoyage Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Self Employed
    Location:
    London
    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?
     
  2. Mar 23, 2010
  3. incrediblestuff

    incrediblestuff SearchingForTheHolyGrail! CAG webmeister

    Occupation:
    Currently: Self employed, Previously: Manager
    Location:
    Mostly the Netherlands
    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 must register/login in order to see the link.
     
  4. Mar 23, 2010
  5. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    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:
    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: Mar 23, 2010
    4 people like this.
  6. Mar 23, 2010
  7. incrediblestuff

    incrediblestuff SearchingForTheHolyGrail! CAG webmeister

    Occupation:
    Currently: Self employed, Previously: Manager
    Location:
    Mostly the Netherlands
    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:)
     
  8. Mar 23, 2010
  9. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    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.
     
  10. Mar 23, 2010
  11. incrediblestuff

    incrediblestuff SearchingForTheHolyGrail! CAG webmeister

    Occupation:
    Currently: Self employed, Previously: Manager
    Location:
    Mostly the Netherlands
    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.
     
  12. Mar 23, 2010
  13. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    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.
     
    1 person likes this.
  14. Mar 23, 2010
  15. incrediblestuff

    incrediblestuff SearchingForTheHolyGrail! CAG webmeister

    Occupation:
    Currently: Self employed, Previously: Manager
    Location:
    Mostly the Netherlands
    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 :)
     
  16. Mar 23, 2010
  17. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    Sometimes it's good to be careful. :thumbsup:
     
  18. Mar 23, 2010
  19. Roanan

    Roanan Banned User - abusive flamming - misogynist

    Occupation:
    Geek
    Location:
    Langley, BC...in Canada, eh?
    There's always the 'no can do list'

    Looks like Betfair qualifies for that one.
     
  20. Mar 23, 2010
  21. chuchu59

    chuchu59 gambling addict CAG PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    EXECUTIVE
    Location:
    SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
    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.
     
  22. Mar 23, 2010
  23. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    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.
     
  24. Mar 23, 2010
  25. Jasminebed

    Jasminebed Closer to 100 than Birth

    Occupation:
    Not in workforce
    Location:
    Ontario
    This may not be helpful to the OP, but Betfair offers a dispute resolution You must register/login in order to see the link.

    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".
     
  26. Mar 23, 2010
  27. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    From their Dispute Resolution page:
     
  28. Mar 24, 2010
  29. visavoyage

    visavoyage Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Self Employed
    Location:
    London
    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?
     
  30. Mar 24, 2010
  31. lee_bumble

    lee_bumble Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Adminstration
    Location:
    UK
    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.
     
  32. Mar 24, 2010
  33. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    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.
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2010
  34. Mar 24, 2010
  35. incrediblestuff

    incrediblestuff SearchingForTheHolyGrail! CAG webmeister

    Occupation:
    Currently: Self employed, Previously: Manager
    Location:
    Mostly the Netherlands
    that upper sentence ^^
    sounds so .... perry mason>.
    :thumbsup:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 24, 2010
  36. Mar 24, 2010
  37. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    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.
     
    1 person likes this.
  38. Mar 24, 2010
  39. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    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!"
     

Share This Page