Used my wife's name to setup account - can a refund be done?

[herc83]

Been a lurker on these forums for a while.

Last year I lost a considerable amount of money gambling with Star Sports Betting. I lost more money than I'd be comfortable saying in the space of two days in July. It was so large that my debit cards/bank stopped taking payments to further chase losses.

Soon after I opened a new account under my wife's name. She, very begrudgingly and at much protest, gave me her card and I was able to use her account to gamble and very quickly lost that too. I lost over £20k under my wife's name (it was my money I was able to transfer from a savings account to her bank account).

Is there any chance of getting this money back? I presume Star Sports Betting rules in the T&C are that you have to be the one gambling if an account is under your name.

They also did no background checks or verification or anything on my wife's name the account was put under. They did not ask for ID or anything. After losing a lot of money, they realised the connection with myself (maybe by the activity or the home address or the high volume of betting?) and refunded the little balance that was left over.

Star Sports Betting have not once seen my wife's ID, her address or asked where the money has come from. Nothing whatsoever.

Does any of this help with me a complaint? Or would any kind of complaint ultimately see myself in trouble for fraud for using my wife's name? Even if she did give me permission, albeit begrudgingly to do so.

My wife is not pissed at me I should say about any of this. If anything she has been incredibly supportive and has helped me overcome my addiction.

 

[ollygarch]

What you were doing is called 'fronting'. You were committing/attempting to commit fraud. I don't see any way you will get the money back. Please admit to yourself and your wife that you have a gambling problem and get some professional help before your life is completely ruined.

 

[anddi32]

So the OP lost money through dishonest means and now you want the money back? If you had won money through dishonest means, would you return it to the casino?

Your wife has approved the activity and you have played your own money through your wife's account. Where is the point that makes the casino obliged to return the lost money?

 

[mulven]

Does any of this help with me a complaint? Or would any kind of complaint ultimately see myself in trouble for fraud for using my wife's name? Even if she did give me permission, albeit begrudgingly to do so.

It is fraud by false representation. You didn't do it to bonus abuse or exploit the casino but it is indeed fraud. You wouldn't get in more trouble than you've already caused yourself though.

Star Sports Betting have not once seen my wife's ID, her address or asked where the money has come from. Nothing whatsoever.

They don't have to force you to pre-verify. CDD eventually got triggered by the sound of it, leading them to investigate and figure out the situation, but it was already too late for you when that happened. From my experience of hitting CDD thresholds, I haven't had my ability to deposit limited by the majority while a few froze all actions. Additionally if its not automatic on their system and has to be done somewhat manually you may have done it too quickly for them to react.

Is there any chance of getting this money back? I presume Star Sports Betting rules in the T&C are that you have to be the one gambling if an account is under your name.

The fault is with you on this one and the casino didn't fail in their duties. It would be nice if they would have caught the behaviour instantly as it was from the same address as a problem gambler but alas.

Even if you didn't commit fraud and had a better case, it's more difficult to get refunds in these kinds of scenarios nowadays due people finding ways to abuse this for profit which unfortunately leads to the actual victims getting screwed. Self exclusion rules have changed a lot due to this. Speaking of which did you even self exclude on your own account? If not it would be even harder for them to flag your partners.

 

[conker]

So someone comes to the forum, having done something reckless and completely out of character (its not every day you beg your wife to give you her debit card to chase losses) and the first reaction is to pile on and tell them how stupid he is?

Gambling addiction makes you do crazy things that you would never dream of doing normally. When you sit back after the event, you cannot believe you have done them. You've let yourself down and you've let others down.

You then start to ask questions and undoubtedly you will have been 'enabled' to spend vast sums of money gambling in short spaces of time.

The responses are probably factually correct here, that there is likely no hope of you getting these losses back. As @ollygarch mentioned, fronting is essentially committing fraud and neither the bank nor the casino would have known it was the OP who had set it all up and not his wife.

The tone is the problem. It reads like posters are laying into the poor bloke, rather than offering him some useful insights. Think about how you are talking to people on the forum when responding to questions, as quite often these people that have suffered huge losses will be quite vulnerable.

 

[herc83]

Thank you everyone for your messages. I am on GameStop and been in addiction therapy for the best part of a year now. My wife has been incredibly supportive.

I guess one thing I’m struggling with is… do star sports not have to prove where money comes from, particularly large amounts, to combat money laundering issues. I understand that doesn’t mean they should refund me or anything but should they not have asked more questions where it came from?

If I had told them that I did the betting on my wife’s account, would they payout with no questions? I doubt it either

 

[herc83]

Like is there terms and conditions of nobody else accessing your account been broken here? Should gambling activity not have to be undertaken by the person they believe the money has come from?

 

[dunover]

What I would like to know is at what stage did this betting site (assuming UKGC licensed) apply SoW checks to the OP in either account he used?
It seems odd, because nowadays as soon as you spend more than the price of a takeaway they are asking for DNA, selfies, scans and family tree.
Or did the OP lose constantly by betting until bust so never initiated a withdrawal, so never arrived at the point he would inevitably have the full weight of regulatory procedure thrown at him?

Judgements about his conduct aside, surely he should have triggered security checks way before getting to the state of losses he did? If not, their CDD checking triggers are totally inadequate as they should automatically block accounts 24/7 to work fairly and effectively.

 

[herc83]

so they did do one check on my own account. I lost stupid money with them over six month period. Too embarrassed to say how much. But they didn’t care. They did one pop up questionnaire with me after losing a small fortune in a day but were satisfied for me to continue. I will write a full account one day. But for now was focusing on the account in my wife’s name as it feels like a casinos terms and conditions are nearly always to side with the business and not the customer. Why are they allowed to take money gambled under a unverified account but they’d never allow that, and neither would t and c behind them, allow it the other way

 

[Reelsoffun]

Bottom line is you broke the T&C’s of any casino not just this one and I should not expect any money back whatsoever. You being a self confessed gambling addict does not absolve or excuse you of your own responsibilities, you chose to do what you did, you need to accept the consequences for your actions.

I would argue that your wife should not have had any part in it either, so I would say it’s just as much her fault as yours, casinos cannot be expected to be held accountable to people who have systematically decided to circumvent multiple rules, terms and laws.

 

[jasonuk]

Rare for one of these to be so clear-cut...

So on your side, what you have described is player fraud - and surprisingly you have been refunded more than you are due, because according to their terms and conditions the amount to be returned is zero:

If we identify that you have opened a duplicate account (e.g. falsified personal details) with Star Sports, all placed bets will be voided and any deposits that have been made on the account will be forfeited and sent to a registered gambling charity organisation.

They would have done some initial checks on the account, which you would have passed because you supplied the correct information.

When it comes to Customer Due Diligence, the current regulations suspend withdrawals but allow a player to continue depositing and playing - because the casino can, if they need to, roll back the clock. However, as you've discovered, this can cause an anti-freeroll for the player.

I guess one thing I’m struggling with is… do star sports not have to prove where money comes from, particularly large amounts, to combat money laundering issues. I understand that doesn’t mean they should refund me or anything but should they not have asked more questions where it came from?

If I had told them that I did the betting on my wife’s account, would they payout with no questions? I doubt it either

Surprisingly, no. Unless they consider you a high risk of money-laundering (as in, they may need to file a report with the National Crime Agency imminently), most of the procedures are forward-looking to reduce the risk of ML... so at the time the CDD (Customer Due Diligence) process was triggered, your current balance is "locked" as future withdrawals are suspended pending CDD - but past deposits and withdrawals are not included.

Once the person doing the CDD review realised what was going on, they closed your account - you would have been asked for documentation at that point, but it sounds like they had enough information to reasonably conclude (correctly) that it wasn't your wife playing.

Depending on how fast you deposited, they could and perhaps should have asked those questions earlier, but the CDD requirements are more flexible for operators than perhaps they should be.

As a footnote - if the money wasn't deposited legitimately, your wife would have spoken to her bank to dispute it - that she hasn't, implies (to the casino) she approved the transaction.

Does any of this help with me a complaint? Or would any kind of complaint ultimately see myself in trouble for fraud for using my wife's name? Even if she did give me permission, albeit begrudgingly to do so.

Nope, additionally if these transactions are from July-August 2023 then most ADR providers will decline to mediate because it is more than 12 months ago.

It's good that you've sought help in the past year and are making positive progress - we wish you well with that recovery.

 

[conker]

If you feel strongly enough, then you could take your experience to the UKGC. They are 99.99% unlikely to do anything other than tell you how sorry they feel for you. However, this will draw to their attention that licensed operators are taking huge deposits from player in very short succession.

Although the story about using your wife's account to deposit and chase losses doesn't reflect brilliantly on you. It will be a reminder to the UKGC that what they currently have in place are not adequately protecting vulnerable people, caught up in addiction, from losing vast amounts of money.

You can submit a complaint about Star Sports Betting

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

 

[conker]

One last pearl of wisdom for me, seriously consider getting registered and set up with

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

Gamstop will only stop you gambling on licensed UK casinos. You will not be protected from the vast number of casinos that will happily see you lose everything you have. You will have no right to reply to any of these outfits either.

Keep in mind that Betblocker may block your access to this forum due to gambling content, so maybe do it once you have finished talking about your situation.

 

[jasonuk]

What you were doing is called 'fronting'. You were committing/attempting to commit fraud. I don't see any way you will get the money back. Please admit to yourself and your wife that you have a gambling problem and get some professional help before your life is completely ruined.

That term mostly applies to insurance (where the listed "main" driver isn't active on the policy, just as a cover for a secondary higher-risk driver), the gambling term would be "gnoming" or multi-accounting.

So someone comes to the forum, having done something reckless and completely out of character (its not every day you beg your wife to give you her debit card to chase losses) and the first reaction is to pile on and tell them how stupid he is?

Gambling addiction makes you do crazy things that you would never dream of doing normally. When you sit back after the event, you cannot believe you have done them. You've let yourself down and you've let others down.

You then start to ask questions and undoubtedly you will have been 'enabled' to spend vast sums of money gambling in short spaces of time.

Welcome to the double-edged sword...

We've seen a lot of these threads over the years and the problem is we don't know the people behind them - we don't know their backgrounds, their motives, or even if they are being truthful with us. They tend to be brand new accounts with the sole intention of finding a way to get their money back.

Abdication of responsibility comes up a lot in these threads - people are very quick to blame the counterparty for what they should or shouldn't have done. We know that gambling addiction is a hell of a demon, and we can try and show compassion for those that are recovering - but we also have to appreciate the intention of the thread, and in some cases that will result in a blunt reply or two.

Player fraud is a very serious issue, and we don't want to condone it at any stage.

 

[conker]

Abdication of responsibility comes up a lot in these threads

Until you've been there you (the royal you) just don't know what its like.

 

[dunover]

Bottom line is you broke the T&C’s of any casino not just this one and I should not expect any money back whatsoever. You being a self confessed gambling addict does not absolve or excuse you of your own responsibilities, you chose to do what you did, you need to accept the consequences for your actions.

I would argue that your wife should not have had any part in it either, so I would say it’s just as much her fault as yours, casinos cannot be expected to be held accountable to people who have systematically decided to circumvent multiple rules, terms and laws.

That is very true, but on the flip side these kind of incidents aren't dissimilar to specific examples cited by the UKGC when you read their statements after fining licensees. Lack of timely intervention and adequate measures in place to trigger said intervention. Player conduct aside, I still find it surprising there was insufficient measures in place to intercept this issue earlier.

As for donating your remaining bankroll to a charity if you have a dupe account, that is the RG equivalent of greenwashing. Wouldn't stand up to legal scrutiny if challenged. If the funds are the player's and have been deposited with the intent of buying gambling and the service was denied for a non-criminal reason, then they should be returned. As indeed they were.

 

[jasonuk]

Until you've been there you (the royal you) just don't know what its like.

Absolutely, I'm fortunate that I haven't experienced it myself, but I've heard tales of horror from those that have.

It makes these threads particularly difficult because you are trying to have a rational conversation (terms and conditions, rights etc) about an irrational situation (the involuntary reaction to gambling caused by addiction).

As difficult as it may be, that's why the emotions need to stay to one side - otherwise the player attributes 100% of the blame to the casino, and the casino attributes 100% of the blame to the player... and we're not leaving square one.

The alternative, as some have previously requested, is to not have these threads at all.

 

[jasonuk]

As for donating your remaining bankroll to a charity if you have a dupe account, that is the RG equivalent of greenwashing. Wouldn't stand up to legal scrutiny if challenged.

I would probably disagree - your balance is forfeit because you broke the terms and conditions, the money is then donated to charity so the casino hasn't profited from the transaction.

If they donated your money to charity then there would be more of an argument (and that can still happen with void bets and abandoned accounts) - but that isn't the case here, there are two distinct steps.

If the funds are the player's and have been deposited with the intent of buying gambling and the service was denied for a non-criminal reason, then they should be returned. As indeed they were.

Only the remaining (small) balance was returned, as if they'd failed CDD. They could have voided that too, but I guess they assumed they were on safer grounds doing it this way...

... although as you say, these scenarios aren't too dissimilar to ones that the UKGC have dished out fines for. Not that it helps the OP because the funds aren't the proceeds of crime, and thus unlikely to be returned.

 

[dunover]

Absolutely, I'm fortunate that I haven't experienced it myself, but I've heard tales of horror from those that have.

The alternative, as some have previously requested, is to not have these threads at all.

On the contrary, viewed with a bit of balance, I think they are a good thing.

I know they can be divisive and solicit judgemental comments, but the OP has got things off their chest and also some advice. That's just the beginning.

They serve to represent the desperation of PGs and remorse ex post facto.

Admittedly they can make some members uncomfortable if it brings back memories of their own actions in the past, remind them of vanquished demons. Then again, the very same people will be be positive knowing they came back from the issues they once had, and this depressing story affirms their positive behaviour since especially if they are wavering.

The threads will often get responses from the operator side too because this is something that affects both parties. The honest input may address potentially disingenuous actions by the gambler as well.

We also offer a non-gamblers section here where problems can be discussed with others who are or have been in an equally negative situation.


Quit Gambling - Casinomeister's Forum: Largest Online Casino Community Since 1998

 

[paul7388]

So someone comes to the forum, having done something reckless and completely out of character (its not every day you beg your wife to give you her debit card to chase losses) and the first reaction is to pile on and tell them how stupid he is?

Gambling addiction makes you do crazy things that you would never dream of doing normally. When you sit back after the event, you cannot believe you have done them. You've let yourself down and you've let others down.

You then start to ask questions and undoubtedly you will have been 'enabled' to spend vast sums of money gambling in short spaces of time.

The responses are probably factually correct here, that there is likely no hope of you getting these losses back. As @ollygarch mentioned, fronting is essentially committing fraud and neither the bank nor the casino would have known it was the OP who had set it all up and not his wife.

The tone is the problem. It reads like posters are laying into the poor bloke, rather than offering him some useful insights. Think about how you are talking to people on the forum when responding to questions, as quite often these people that have suffered huge losses will be quite vulnerable.

Think that post is actually quite harsh. The members merely pointed out that it was fraud and he had no chance of getting a refund and should not be looking for one.

Nothing nasty in any of the posts.

And d9nt actually think there was anything that bad in the tone either. Actually think it's worse the way you're telling them they shouldn't post like that as they have no idea what the OP's going through and what addiction makes you do.

Might be correct but actually not sure how you know what he's gone through. Its a post saying that he deposited large sums and his bank blocked his cards so he set up an account in wife's name. For all you know he could afford the losses. Or for all you know he could just be another person setting up an account in someone else's name to try and freeroll the casino.

End of the day he signed up asking if he should get the money back. The members basically told him why should he as it's fraud and he's no chance and should not even be trying. And they get told their posts are out of order.

 

[dunover]

I would probably disagree - your balance is forfeit because you broke the terms and conditions, the money is then donated to charity so the casino hasn't profited from the transaction.

Irrelevant. It's like getting evicted from your house if you broke the terms of your mortgage by not paying it for months. After recovering monies owed and resonable legitimate expenses, when the property is sold the remaining equity funds (if at all) must be returned to the mortgagee. It's a basic principle of tort. It's like the mortgagor arbitrarily decides (whether in contract terms or not) to donate your equity to a homeless charity. Wouldn't stand.

People often assume terms are 'fair' and legally upholdable when they are very far from it. It's the basic principle of fuckery that weasel-wording is used or vacuous disclaimers like Tesco saying "Vehicles are parked here at owner's risk. We are not liable for any etc......" which is in fact nonsense as by offering you the facility to park as part of their selling service and encouragement to use said service, they do bear responsibility to make them safe and secure on your behalf. People have made many a successful claim in those cases, but only a few as most are put off by the aggressive wording. Waivers and disclaimers are there for one reason and have no legal standing in most situations.

 

[jasonuk]

Irrelevant. It's like getting evicted from your house if you broke the terms of your mortgage by not paying it for months. After recovering monies owed and resonable legitimate expenses, when the property is sold the remaining equity funds (if at all) must be returned to the mortgagee. It's a basic principle of tort. It's like the mortgagor arbitrarily decides (whether in contract terms or not) to donate your equity to a homeless charity. Wouldn't stand.

I wouldn't say you can compare the two. The first, while a breach of contract, appears to be codified by law (Law of Property Act 1925) and leads to a court order (repossession). The second is a straight breach of contract.

A tort is a civil wrong other than a breach of contract, so wouldn't apply in this case.

People often assume terms are 'fair' and legally upholdable when they are very far from it. It's the basic principle of fuckery that weasel-wording is used or vacuous disclaimers like Tesco saying "Vehicles are parked here at owner's risk. We are not liable for any etc......" which is in fact nonsense as by offering you the facility to park as part of their selling service and encouragement to use said service, they do bear responsibility to make them safe and secure on your behalf. People have made many a successful claim in those cases, but only a few as most are put off by the aggressive wording. Waivers and disclaimers are there for one reason and have no legal standing in most situations.

Despite the previous strawman, I would agree here - many "legal disclaimers" are legal in the sense the lawyers put them there, rather than they'd stand up to scrutiny in court.

While legal action is beyond the scope of this forum, we have seen cases (such as the infamous Betfair Happy Hour) where operators have caved at the threat of legal action because they don't want to set a bad precedent for themselves.

And that'll be why they refunded the small remaining balance - they appear to be in a much stronger legal standing regarding funds already lost (e.g.

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

), and for such a small amount they don't want to rock the boat regarding a term that may or may not stand up to legal scrutiny in court.

 

[dunover]

A tort is a civil wrong other than a breach of contract, so wouldn't apply in this case.

It would, because as I was saying the contract cannot be allowed to override any rights or obligations granted in common law, or court application thereof (usually in previous rulings or cases-in-law). Agreed, it wouldn't apply to a common established and fair contract, but where the contract is deemed prejudicial in regards to that it effectively ceases to be relevant to any ruling or decision which becomes a tort ruling.

I know it may seem like splitting hairs, but in this instance the terms do seem to assume ownership of funds that in comparable circumstances elsewhere would lawfully belong to you. So it is a civil wrong against one party and not a contractual dispute.

 

[jasonuk]

It would, because as I was saying the contract cannot be allowed to override any rights or obligations granted in common law, or court application thereof (usually in previous rulings or cases-in-law). Agreed, it wouldn't apply to a common established and fair contract, but where the contract is deemed prejudicial in regards to that it effectively ceases to be relevant to any ruling or decision which becomes a tort ruling.

As before, a tort ruling generally covers civil matters outside contractual disputes... the likely outcome of such a contract dispute would be that the clauses are enforceable or unenforceable, and money retained or returned accordingly.

The closest example I could think of was gift cards / virtual cards - those have "real money" on, which can be forfeit for breaking the terms and conditions (such as inactivity). It's not a bank, it's not necessarily a regulated financial institution, in many cases your money isn't protected if the casino (or retailer) goes bust...

I know it may seem like splitting hairs, but in this instance the terms do seem to assume ownership of funds that in comparable circumstances elsewhere would lawfully belong to you. So it is a civil wrong against one party and not a contractual dispute.

It is a little, but you need to keep the stages separate otherwise it muddies the water considerably. The casino is not "assuming" ownership of the money:

• The player violates the terms of the contract
• The operator activates a clause in the contract, and the player balance is deducted accordingly. This money now, according to the contract, belongs to the casino.
• The player is entitled to their balance after the deduction is applied - which in this example is zero.

So the primary question is whether that second step is considered enforceable - and that would be one for the courts to decide.

It's worth noting that the lawyers have been arguing over contract penalties a lot in the past 50 years - which includes multiple iterations of unfair contract legislation,

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

which now focuses on if the detriment is proportional. And naturally, one of the cases was about parking "penalty" notices

Since the legitimate interests of the innocent party (the casino operator in this case) would include fraud prevention, AML and responsible gambling... that is a lot of regulatory things to hide behind. Saying that, the proportionality argument might flip if the amount in question was substantial (e.g. tens of thousands), but that's what lawyers are for...

(edit: for clarity, above is a tangential discussion and not directly related to the OP situation)