Betfred vs £1.7 million

Spikie

Experienced Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2016
Location
Uk
In the news today , a story about Betfred refusing to pay £1.7 million on a Frankie Dettori Magic Seven blackjack jackpot for the last 4 years, due to a software glitch.

Now going to the high court , the sum is up to 2 million with interest.

apparently Betfred were congratulating the man for a week before they refused the payout due to a malfunction in Playtech’s software.

However, the player’s lawyers are sure that in Betfreds terms and conditions they cannot withold payment for Playtech’s malfunction.

Also the player was offered 60000 as compensation with an NDA, but he refused.

Will be interesting to see the outcome.
 

Slottery

Meister Member
PABnoaccred
MM
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Location
Malta
Here's story about this written almost two years ago, probably operator/provider need to give something more than their honest word about malfunction...

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

pinnit2014

Meister Member
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
What exactly is the malfunction? There was a jackpot, he won it. Not as if it flashed up saying the bloke won 170million.

Or is the malfunction that it paid the jackpot out on the Monday, not the pre-determined Thursday?

We have evidence, not we don't but we've been informed there is some, but it's top secret. But it exists, honestly Guv'nor.

Edit - i read the story as Mr Green had been trying to get to the bottom of it and thought, 'Ah, that's nice, another casino's helping him!'
 

pinnit2014

Meister Member
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
Think Betfred are on very dodgy ground having offered 60k but under a non disclosure agreement,
Usually in law things are black and white, the offer indicated some liability to pay,and without any
firm evidence of a fault the courts will hopefully rule against them.

Yeah, bit like your insurance company losing their rag when you said 'all i did was say to the guy at the accident i'd pay to fix it' - oopsie daisy

Nice to see some of the contractual terms being tested in court after the default position 'it's in their terms' always being used against players - nice little test of fairness and proportionality coming up
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
Interesting case, I hope he's got legal expenses cover + gone no win no fee, as you just never know with courts, personally I think the ukgc should be involved in a case like this, kind of undermines their regulation if someone can win £1.7 million and then a week later be denied the money on a software glitch. Why shouldn't playtech have to be insured themselves to cover their own software glitching, thus honouring the bet.
 
Last edited:

EkJR

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Location
Glasgow
Think Betfred are on very dodgy ground having offered 60k but under a non disclosure agreement,
Usually in law things are black and white, the offer indicated some liability to pay,and without any
firm evidence of a fault the courts will hopefully rule against them.

The UKGC will hammer them for that hopefully. NDAs were something that they were keen to eradicate as it meant that operators could essentially bypass LCCP rules and pay out if anyone complained but not face the UKGC.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
This is the main reason I wouldn't go near any playtech games. I've heard this glitch excuses way too many times. They just don't want people to win.

Read this and weep - possibly the biggest scandal in the history of CM.

Stipulations on Playtech progressive win

EDIT - in fact I think every CM member should read this thread and thank their lucky stars for increased regulation and accountability now. Hills still have some serious questions to answer here IMO.
 

CertaCas

Full Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Location
A spinning globe
Read this and weep - possibly the biggest scandal in the history of CM.

Stipulations on Playtech progressive win

EDIT - in fact I think every CM member should read this thread and thank their lucky stars for increased regulation and accountability now. Hills still have some serious questions to answer here IMO.

Unbelievable ... thank you for that link, I missed that story.
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
interesting bits from that bbc article I didn't see in the others:


Betfred licences the software for its online games from another company Playtech, which has refused to confirm the nature of the software glitch.

By law, Playtech has to notify the Gambling Commission of Great Britain of the fault, known as a "key event". Mr Coyle says the description of what happened is only four lines long and does not describe the nature of the problem.

Despite repeated requests, Mr Green's lawyers say Betfred has been unable to prove there was a software problem at all. Neither has the company attempted to drag its supplier Playtech into the case.

If the court rules in Mr Green's favour, other gamblers denied their winnings due to technical problems could be able to make similar claims.

------------


If there was a glitch in a game and loads of people found out about it and made a fortune exploiting it, I could understand that clause being enacted to halt the payouts at withdrawal stage, but in this case where an individual wins the jackpot it's a different kettle of fish imo.

If betfred had paid out would they need to obtain the money from playtech with a jackpot game?
 

Bloatgoat

Senior Member
webby
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Location
Somewhere
Ive never seen a casino offering 30 to 60k as part of a settlement, for those who won a jackpot before and it was claimed to be a software glitch. What i do think is that the casino refuses to payout that sum due to financial liabilitys. And this court case is a very interesting one.
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
Read the daily mail's write up on this in the saturday paper just gone, and it said something like the trophy cards kept on appearing for the player when that shouldn't have happened, they were meant to be randomly dealt but in fact weren't, something like that, which I thought is a bigger story in a way for us, and would like trance's opinion on how that could happen in a tested game.

I'll see if I can find the quote online...
 
Last edited:

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


The judge replied: 'The case against you [betfred] is there are ways of protecting yourself from an enormous catastrophic loss that may be caused by something that's remedial* and you didn't take them.

'Mr Couser says this clause does not work for this purpose.'

Mr Osborne [betfreds lawyer] replied: 'My learned friend makes the submission that Betfred should have tested this better* but there's a whole regime around that.

'We all know software can contain errors and defects.

'These cards were meant to be random and they weren't.' :confused:


edit: I'd be questioning how long had the game been available for, when was it released and why has the fault only come to light now, surely a programmed random game can't just change and decide at some point in time not be random? If you were ukgc surely they'd want to audit and check other games from playtech for similar faults?
 
Last edited:

CasinoNinja

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Apr 27, 2017
Location
UK
So it was a side bet where you can win 7777x your stake and not a progressive.

So he must have been betting quite big numbers on the side bet to get that several times over.
 

TheAddict

Ueber Meister
Joined
Jan 9, 2013
Location
Kent
"Because of the defect the trophy cards weren't being reset.. More and more trophy cards went in and none ever went away."



"How to Play Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven Blackjack

Like any game of blackjack, Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven requires an initial ante. Once you’ve wagered at least £1, cards are dealt in the way you’d expect - i.e. you receive two cards face-up, while the dealer has one card exposed. Following the initial deal, standing, hitting, doubling down and splitting (pairs) are all potential moves. However, none of that is really interesting. The real reason Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven Blackjack is leading the field by a length is its side game.

To take part in the side game, you’ll need to make extra bet beside your main ante. Once you’ve activated the special feature, the rules are simple: collect as many trophies as you can. Basically, when the bonus game is live, trophy cards can appear during the initial deal. Any time you collect at least one trophy card, your side bet is automatically carried over to the next deal. If you collect two trophies, you’ll get your stake back. Collect three trophies and you’ll secure a 1x payout. Continue this pattern all the way up to seven consecutive trophies and you win ever-increasing prizes that top out at 70X your bet.

To win even more cash, seven trophy cards during two consecutive deals will unlock Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven jackpot, which is worth 7,777x your stake"



Don't know the game but i assume with these rules, if playing it for a while, thus activating the trophy part of the game more often - without ever quitting/closing the game (which if you quit the game to the main menu, I assume DOES reset the trophy cards) then over time, you'd be doing cartwheels around the living room thinking you're on some Godlike status winning run :D
Probably telling your friends this game is amazing, and you spent all night on it but couldn't lose. Friends who then only spend 20 minutes on it, tell you you were just one lucky gambling addicted bastard, and that it's shit.
 

paul7388

Ueber Meister
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Location
glasgow scotland
edit: I'd be questioning how long had the game been available for, when was it released and why has the fault only come to light now, surely a programmed random game can't just change and decide at some point in time not be random? If you were ukgc surely they'd want to audit and check other games from playtech for similar faults?

Don't think it stopped being random.

I would imagine it is same as anything and that it just glitched. Be like playing a slot and something goes wrong. By sounds of it this is first time it has ever happened so no amount of audits would pick up a glitch. Same as many computer programmes in every aspect of life balls up occasionally.

Never played the game but by sounds of it the cards were random. But on every hand certain cards contain a trophy and you can be dealt those cards.

Obviously only a few cards should have one and once they have been dealt those cards go back into pack and no longer have trophies . But for some reason the game glitched and instead of removing trophies the cards kept them. So as his game went on it was getting to stage where every card had a trophy as they were not getting removed from used cards.

Big error but doubt in all the testing it had ever happened before. Anything out computer wise can glitch at anytime, Hence reason all slots have the term error or malfunction voids bet as any slot could glitch at any time.
 
Top