Betfred

[EkJR]

Not been on in a while. Wanted to run this one past CM for your take on it, not involving me but someone I know.

Anyway. Person opens account at Betfred on the 10th of November. Plays and makes a withdrawal in the first few days. Everything fine, fully verified and money received. Then on the 18th hits a decent win and withdraws £1500. On the 19th withdraws an additional £500.

On the 21st the withdrawal of £500 is received. The person then checks to see why they havent got the £1500 and the account is "locked". Emails Betfred...they take til today to respond. The response..."breach of an SE agreement so the account is closed and Betfred accepts no liability for anything that occurs gambling in SE period".

The person took a 1 year exclusion from Betfred over Jan this year due to crap betting odds and didnt really know better. Anyway, fair enough, account closed...but no other money is coming. So many questions.

1. Why was the person allowed to open an account. Only difference in details was on email add.

2. Why did Betfred not pay the 1st withdrawal and allowed the withdrawal the day after go through?Both have 48 hour pending period as well.

3. Where does the player stand in getting the £1500? The solution would either be to return deposits or to pay the account balance and close the account. Nothing has happened there.

4. The same person was allowed to open an account AFTER all this had happened on Oddsking and again no SE detected.

Think it's a comedy of errors to be fair and I definitely dont think Betfred are being fair at all here.

 

[Gaz237]

Not been on in a while. Wanted to run this one past CM for your take on it, not involving me but someone I know.

Anyway. Person opens account at Betfred on the 10th of November. Plays and makes a withdrawal in the first few days. Everything fine, fully verified and money received. Then on the 18th hits a decent win and withdraws £1500. On the 19th withdraws an additional £500.

On the 21st the withdrawal of £500 is received. The person then checks to see why they havent got the £1500 and the account is "locked". Emails Betfred...they take til today to respond. The response..."breach of an SE agreement so the account is closed and Betfred accepts no liability for anything that occurs gambling in SE period".

The person took a 1 year exclusion from Betfred over Jan this year due to crap betting odds and didnt really know better. Anyway, fair enough, account closed...but no other money is coming. So many questions.

1. Why was the person allowed to open an account. Only difference in details was on email add.

2. Why did Betfred not pay the 1st withdrawal and allowed the withdrawal the day after go through?Both have 48 hour pending period as well.

3. Where does the player stand in getting the £1500? The solution would either be to return deposits or to pay the account balance and close the account. Nothing has happened there.

4. The same person was allowed to open an account AFTER all this had happened on Oddsking and again no SE detected.

Think it's a comedy of errors to be fair and I definitely dont think Betfred are being fair at all here.

What's fair plays no part.

He/you should get his/your deposits back (but he/you knew that before depositing), but if he/you has been paid out more than he deposited, then he/you has had a result. Your not getting your deposits on top.

Or he could send any winnings received back to the Casino, seeing as they were on a lose lose, that would be fair, but unlikely.

You or your mate, could of signed up to a myriad of casinos, yet just happen to sign up to one they/you knew they were SE from, by changing the email.

If you/they had lost all their deposits you/they would be here demanding all your/their deposits to be returned because of the SE.

Now you/they have won the free ride, you want the SE to be overlooked and have your/their winnings paid out.

The funniest part is you think Betfred are being unfair, by not paying out.

 

[EkJR]

What's fair plays no part.

He/you should get his/your deposits back (but he/you knew that before depositing), but if he/you has been paid out more than he deposited, then he/you has had a result. Your not getting your deposits on top.

Or he could send any winnings received back to the Casino, that would be fair, but unlikely.

You or your mate, could of signed up to a myriad of casinos, yet just happen to sign up to one they/you knew they were SE from, by changing the email.

If you/they had lost all their deposits you/they would be here demanding all your/their deposits to be returned because of the SE.

Now you/they have won the free ride, you want the SE to be overlooked and have your/their winnings paid out.

The funniest part is you think Betfred are being unfair, by not paying out.

Sorry Gaz, what's with the you/they crap? I publicly stated that I havent played at a casino for weeks now as I am on Gamstop again and I would not put myself into a position like that but you believe what you like!

The person in question forgot about any SE. The casino allowed the person who was SE'd to sign up and play. The casino were happy to pay said player on an initial withdrawal without any issue. The casino actually ignored a 2nd withdrawal and paid a 3rd one and then closed the account completely ignoring the 2nd and largest amount. The individuals deposits did exceed the two withdrawals that were processed so the player has lost out. The casino cannot have it both ways is the point that's being made. In fact, the player is within their rights to report the casino for a failure of SE given they have bypassed a system designed to stop them playing by changing an email address. What makes it even worse is that the same player was then able to open an account at Oddsking after Betfred excluded the latest account. They are on the same licence and in the UK SE must be applied that way. In my opinion it is a serious fuck up from Betfred and they either need to pay the difference between the deposits and withdrawals already issued or pay the remaining balance. Still completely baffled by the withdrawal situation as well. They have clearly denied the biggest amount despite this being withdrawn before another amount that they did actually send to the player!

Also, if you think it is an acceptable SE policy to be able to change one single detail to bypass then your off your head given it fails part of their LCCP.

 

[Gaz237]

Sorry Gaz, what's with the you/they crap? I publicly stated that I havent played at a casino for weeks now as I am on Gamstop again and I would not put myself into a position like that but you believe what you like!

The person in question forgot about any SE. The casino allowed the person who was SE'd to sign up and play. The casino were happy to pay said player on an initial withdrawal without any issue. The casino actually ignored a 2nd withdrawal and paid a 3rd one and then closed the account completely ignoring the 2nd and largest amount. The individuals deposits did exceed the two withdrawals that were processed so the player has lost out. The casino cannot have it both ways is the point that's being made. In fact, the player is within their rights to report the casino for a failure of SE given they have bypassed a system designed to stop them playing by changing an email address. What makes it even worse is that the same player was then able to open an account at Oddsking after Betfred excluded the latest account. They are on the same licence and in the UK SE must be applied that way. In my opinion it is a serious fuck up from Betfred and they either need to pay the difference between the deposits and withdrawals already issued or pay the remaining balance. Still completely baffled by the withdrawal situation as well. They have clearly denied the biggest amount despite this being withdrawn before another amount that they did actually send to the player!

Also, if you think it is an acceptable SE policy to be able to change one single detail to bypass then your off your head given it fails part of their LCCP.

You already knew they have to return the deposits.

You only started this thread to try and find a way to get them to pay the winnings.

It ain't happening.

Classic gravy train.

 

[EkJR]

You already knew they have to return the deposits.

You only started this thread to try and find a way to get them to pay the winnings.

It ain't happening.

Classic gravy train.

Gaz, I can assure you, if it was me I would have reported them to the UKGC instantly.

The fact is that the player is left in absolute limbo here and has incurred a loss. They have chose to pay some amounts and not others...what is the process for deciding that? The whole situation is bizarre and that's why it's been posted. I would be more than capable of arguing the case for the player if required, but the point of the post was to ask opinions on the situation as it is fairly unique in that it took them until a sizeable withdrawal(seemingly) to find this other SE account and was not found after 2 withdrawals were approved and numerous deposits were made over a 2 week period. The point also is that they are NOT returning anything else, they have washed their hands of it and cancelled the withdrawal and they player has lost out as they are left with a loss overall.

Gravy train this is most certainly not...it is highlighting what is, on the face of it, unscrupulous behaviour by a casino and high street bookmaker.

 

[EkJR]

You only started this thread to try and find a way to get them to pay the winnings.

The above is so far off the mark its unreal. I dont think the player should get the winnings at all. I cannot though understand how they decide that withdrawal 1 is ok....withdrawal 2 isn't and withdrawal 3 is ok...it makes absolutely no sense!

 

[colinsunderland]

You already knew they have to return the deposits.

You only started this thread to try and find a way to get them to pay the winnings.

It ain't happening.

Classic gravy train.

I doubt that seeing as they don't have a rep here and don't engage with player communities.

The bottom line is they shouldn't have allowed play. They have to verify before allowing deposits and play to take place, if the only detail that was changed was an email address, then they should have detected the active SE at a much earlier stage.

 

[Slottery]

I wonder if their system can be that weird that it accept duclicate phone number, that and email both usually are handled as quite uniques without dublicates?

 

[flyingguy]

Having used Betfred before, I'd take a guess that up to a certain withdrawal value can be processed without additional checks, the second withdrawal was higher so went off for approval which took a long time (they are very slow) and by the time they came back and had done the SE checks the 3rd lower withdrawal had been paid. Does that sound feasible? It's pretty poor organisation and management all round.

 

[EkJR]

Having used Betfred before, I'd take a guess that up to a certain withdrawal value can be processed without additional checks, the second withdrawal was higher so went off for approval which took a long time (they are very slow) and by the time they came back and had done the SE checks the 3rd lower withdrawal had been paid. Does that sound feasible? It's pretty poor organisation and management all round.

Yeah it probably is that. However, it's absolutely crazy that it's taken that long and only found on this additional check. Then the comms with the player have been absolutely shocking thereafter. One email to say "found an SE, your account is closed" that was it. Completely unresponsive to anything since. The player has lodged a complaint now so we will see how that goes.

 

[Slottery]

Having used Betfred before, I'd take a guess that up to a certain withdrawal value can be processed without additional checks, the second withdrawal was higher so went off for approval which took a long time (they are very slow) and by the time they came back and had done the SE checks the 3rd lower withdrawal had been paid. Does that sound feasible? It's pretty poor organisation and management all round.

That's how these fake detail accounts usually get found which pass automatic verification. Still wonder if same phone number really been used both times?

Don't think there is much to get from complaint, casino won't probably reply much more than that different details were used and self-exclusion circumvented and SE agreement breached, dunno what more there should be than that one email that player broke agreement and account remain closed?

 

[EkJR]

That's how these fake detail accounts usually get found which pass automatic verification. Still wonder if same phone number really been used both times?

Don't think there is much to get from complaint, casino won't probably reply much more than that different details were used and self-exclusion circumvented and SE agreement breached, dunno what more there should be than that one email that player broke agreement and account remain closed?

It was the same phone number used both times. RG team at Betfred have emailed this morning about it. There has been a glitch with the original SE they are suggesting. The accounts have now been merged and a SE applied which ends in Jan. They are honouring the withdrawal of £1500 as well and have advised that if the player had lost they wouldn't be refunding anything. I am sure another couple of operators now adopt the same stance. So...the player will get all their winnings.

 

[Slottery]

Would still report it to UKGC, it's really severe glitch if such registration is allowed with same phone number and then they also should have void all gameplay instead of paying winnings, that's another severe RG failure.

 

[EkJR]

Would still report it to UKGC, it's really severe glitch if such registration is allowed with same phone number and then they also should have void all gameplay instead of paying winnings, that's another severe RG failure.

They dont and this is the term they stand behind on it.

Although Betfred will do everything we can to support the agreement the responsibility not to gamble remains with you and Betfred will accept no liability for any gambling that may be undertaken during any period of self-exclusion

 

[flyingguy]

That clause is such a load of BS and so many casinos use it. Its another way of saying, we've not invested enough in our systems so it's your fault if we don't catch you soon enough. Fair enough if you use different details and they only match you on more detailed verification, but automated systems these days should flag you up in seconds. Name and birthdate should be the check, yes there will be more than one Chris Smith born on the 1st December, but at that point ask for further details to confirm you're not the same person, don't do it a week later once said gambler has lost his rent and food money for the month.

 

[EkJR]

That clause is such a load of BS and so many casinos use it. Its another way of saying, we've not invested enough in our systems so it's your fault if we don't catch you soon enough. Fair enough if you use different details and they only match you on more detailed verification, but automated systems these days should flag you up in seconds. Name and birthdate should be the check, yes there will be more than one Chris Smith born on the 1st December, but at that point ask for further details to confirm you're not the same person, don't do it a week later once said gambler has lost his rent and food money for the month.

Of course it is but in this one situation it has actually worked out for the player. They wouldn't be able to cancel winnings. The stance is really, if you lose then your fucked which is a terrible position to take and essentially means that people will be able to walk past basically no checks to gamble. It's completely against LCCP as well.

 

[Slottery]

If there really have been clitch which allowed two registrations with same phone number, it's really extreme failure that would need to be reported if care about responsible gaming and regulations.

Also their decision to pay winnings to a self-excluded player is really questionable when they did it even they knew person is self-excluded. Think this should be pointed to regulator. They don't even need to know specific case but ask from Betfred if something like this has happened that at anytime same phone number registration was possible.

 

[flyingguy]

Perhaps they agreed to pay out as they think it's less likely someone is going to complain about their SE handling procedures. Seems all the casinos these days are terrified of being slapped with fines, understandably so!

 

[EkJR]

If there really have been clitch which allowed two registrations with same phone number, it's really extreme failure that would need to be reported if care about responsible gaming and regulations.

Also their decision to pay winnings to a self-excluded player is really questionable when they did it even they knew person is self-excluded. Think this should be pointed to regulator. They don't even need to know specific case but ask from Betfred if something like this has happened that at anytime same phone number registration was possible.

It's in the term they quoted. Basically if you bypass our systems we wont be liable for any losses incurred. Boylesports and some others have almost identical terms. They have to pay winnings/balance though when they do actually find the exclusion. It's likely to make them more money than not. On your first point...absolutely and it will be against their LCCP.