Everymatrix. Court Order ignored

Dadoftwo78

Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Location
England
Hi
Hoping for some advice.
I was in a lot.of difficulty and tried to self exclude from Betregal by email. This was ignored and I continued to deposit for weeks.
I complained to betregal and everymatrix who denied they had done anything wrong.
I then went the small claims route and everything was ignored. The courts awarded me judgement and have issued an order to everymatrix to refund me £5k.

They are not responding to any emails and I am at a loss as to where I take this.

Any advice most welcome
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
As ColSun says above you need to report this to the UKGC. I saw this thread and immediately assumed it was the same one as before, because believe it or not another CM member won a CCJ against EM for the EMSEB issue (EveryMatrix Self Exclusion Bullshit). He wasn't paid on the grounds he had SE'd from another site under the license. As the casino hadn't made the player aware in their terms of other casinos sharing their license, he took them to CC. He won by default as it seems EM (despite the UKGC requiring contacts/office/assets in the UK) didn't contest it on the grounds 'EM aren't a business entity' lol....

With the above in mind, getting the Sheriffs involved via a High Court Enforcement Order (about 60 quid) to collect the debt may not be fruitful. The main route of attack would be the UKGC therefore, as having outstanding CCJ's to players is not going to go down well with the licensing.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
As ColSun says above you need to report this to the UKGC. I saw this thread and immediately assumed it was the same one as before, because believe it or not another CM member won a CCJ against EM for the EMSEB issue (EveryMatrix Self Exclusion Bullshit). He wasn't paid on the grounds he had SE'd from another site under the license. As the casino hadn't made the player aware in their terms of other casinos sharing their license, he took them to CC. He won by default as it seems EM (despite the UKGC requiring contacts/office/assets in the UK) didn't contest it on the grounds 'EM aren't a business entity' lol....

With the above in mind, getting the Sheriffs involved via a High Court Enforcement Order (about 60 quid) to collect the debt may not be fruitful. The main route of attack would be the UKGC therefore, as having outstanding CCJ's to players is not going to go down well with the licensing.

I couldn't find that thread when I was looking for it, but I seem to remember a rep got involved and he got paid.
Considering this is the second one of these, against the same company, maybe its time to look at if any casinos under the license should be accredited? @Casinomeister
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
I couldn't find that thread when I was looking for it, but I seem to remember a rep got involved and he got paid.
Considering this is the second one of these, against the same company, maybe its time to look at if any casinos under the license should be accredited? @Casinomeister

They're not contesting the summonses which means they automatically lose, whether they were in the wrong or not. This suggests the Licensee has no physical presence in the UK. The problem isn't with the individual casinos, they generally behave quite well, but because EM handle the financials it's they who make non-payment decisions and hold the SE information. It's a bit unfair on their individual operators when this happens. I'll find you the thread.

Jetbull/Everymatrix Scam Update - Non payment of Court Order
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
They're not contesting the summonses which means they automatically lose, whether they were in the wrong or not. This suggests the Licensee has no physical presence in the UK. The problem isn't with the individual casinos, they generally behave quite well, but because EM handle the financials it's they who make non-payment decisions and hold the SE information. It's a bit unfair on their individual operators when this happens. I'll find you the thread.

Jetbull/Everymatrix Scam Update - Non payment of Court Order

Thanks for that. :thumbsup:
I know its not the individual casinos but the casino makes the choice to go with EM, and the problems like this aren't exactly hard to find, I know for a fact I would find this if I was opening a casino and trying to decide who to go with for the license. The fact is, while the share the license like this, these problems will continue. It's also not the problem of the customer if EM have an office address in the UK that they say papers can be served at, then don't collect their mail.

I'm not saying the casinos should be put in the pit, but if a licensee ignores court papers, then customers have no legal recourse, so not sure, in that instance, accreditation should be allowed.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
Thanks for that. :thumbsup:
I know its not the individual casinos but the casino makes the choice to go with EM, and the problems like this aren't exactly hard to find, I know for a fact I would find this if I was opening a casino and trying to decide who to go with for the license. The fact is, while the share the license like this, these problems will continue. It's also not the problem of the customer if EM have an office address in the UK that they say papers can be served at, then don't collect their mail.

I'm not saying the casinos should be put in the pit, but if a licensee ignores court papers, then customers have no legal recourse, so not sure, in that instance, accreditation should be allowed.


I already reported the matter to Bryan. See how he feels.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
It's possible that EM might try the "didn't receive the paperwork" approach if they get too many CCJs against them, however if they tried this they would be walking into a trap as all the players need do is prove that papers were served at the address EM have registered with the UKGC. If EM manage to set aside the judgements on these grounds, they may find the UKGC comes after them for not having this "physical presence", which isn't just a case of having a maildrop, it actually has to operate as a means of service of official documents, UKGC edicts, and of course court claims.

I am surprised the UKGC are not already leaning on them as the last unpaid CCJ was from 2016.
 
Top