+1
You’re wrong The Dunph. If you place a bet with a licensed regulated bookmaker then it is legally binding, the bet itself is indeed the contract between parties. The ‘palpable error’ is only allowed because bookmakers have it in their T’s&C’s that you agreed to when you open an account.
Bookies never pay if they don’t feel like it. Take Shane Lowrys mates as an example
I don’t know that particular story? Im sure they were in breach of the T’s&C’s of their account, otherwise they would win in a courthouse.
Simple solution here.
MBB - Did lads get paid out by PP?
[quote=“The Tipping King, post: 713741”]
Yes, yes they are. It’s a licensed and regulated industry, betting contracts are legally forceable.[/quote]
Wrong,they don’t have to pay a penny.
[quote=“caoimhaoin, post: 713751”]Simple solution here.
MBB - Did lads get paid out by PP?[/quote]
I’ll try dig out the article but pretty sure the in house lads did anyway.
[quote=“myboyblue, post: 713753”]
I’ll try dig out the article but pretty sure the in house lads did anyway.[/quote]
Great. It could be argued by anyone who placed a bet that they did not know the game had been played either and were as of unaware of the change in time if game as Paddy Power. Powers couldn’t have much ti say to that.
Also, an this is a genuine question, I don’t know the answer, is there any difference legally between an online bet and an office bet? I mean just cos it’s easier for PP, there is no more right fir them to not pay an online account as an over the counter bet, surely?
Pretty sure there is something that protects the bookmarkers and they don’t have to pay out. Now maybe Powers only copped onto the thing in Laois once it was too late and money had been paid out but I do know that if a bookmaker advertises a price wrong they do not have to pay out at the incorrect price. There was some lad on Matt Cooper years ago who had backed Liverpool at 66/1 (or something similar) not to retain the European Cup after he saw it in store - the bet should have been 1/66 and the bookie in question was not obliged to honour the 66/1 bet despite it being their mistake.
Cant copy and paste, heres the link - http://www.leinsterexpress.ie/sport/gaelic-games/punters-catch-on-as-paddy-power-lose-track-of-time-1-2048835
If its an obvious error they don’t have to pay as TTK says. Of course what can be seen as an obvious error is wide open.
On the Lowry thing TTK his mates backed him to win the Irish open @ 500/1 pp said it was an error and only paid out at a reduced price. It’s easy say it’s an error after the fact. 500/1 is about right for an unheard of amateur to win an open in my book
Foley may be able to confirm this but as far as I know gambling debts are debts of honour and are not enforceable in the courts. They changed the law in England recently and there they are enforceable.
It was always based on a gentlemens agreement type of way which holds up to fuck all in court.
Reputable bookies would have charts and rules about when the price is an obvious error. Take Skybet for example, i opened an account with them to back a 50/1 shot where the price was wrong but they cried foul and told me it should have been 16/1 i think they said. I told them that wasn’t even palpable as going by other bookies rules it would only be if the true odds were 12/1 or 14/1. I asked them to quote their own rules in the instance. They weren’t able to and admitted that they make it up as they went along. They then said “Oh, actually your correct price should have been 12/1 not 16/1. We have to void your bet.” I asked them to close down my account then and that was my one and only experience with them.
In the Laois case blueboy is referring to, i seem to recall it a few years ago where fellas were betting on some local soccer or GAA match after the result was known. There are simple rules for this, the bet is late and they have no obligation and in fact should not pay it. Money back straight away. I think Powers might have paid out though in that case on account of all the negative publicity it brought, and i’m sure it didn’t cost them a huge amount to pay up either.
That has always been the way, gambling debts aren’t forceable. Completely different story to the contract of a bet.
That sounds bizarre Julio, iirc Lowry was 1000.0 on betfair when he won the Irish Open so they should have had no problem paying out. They definitely had a case for full payment if they went that route.
As I said yesterday they are not legally enforceable. There is a lot of academic discussion re changing the law in relation to gambling at present.
(Unless the statute has been repealed)
The gaming and lotteries act
36.—(1) Every contract by way of gaming or wagering is void.
(2) No action shall lie for the recovery of any money or thing which is alleged to be won or to have been paid upon a wager or which has been deposited to abide the event on which a wager is made.
(3) A promise, express or implied, to pay any person any money paid by him under or in respect of a contract to which this section applies or to pay any money by way of commission, fee, reward or otherwise in respect of the contract or of any services connected with the contract is void and no action shall lie for the recovery of any such money.
(4) This section does not apply to any agreement to subscribe or contribute to any plate, prize or sum of money to be awarded to the winner or winners of any game, sport or pastime not prohibited by this Act provided that the subscription or contribution is not a stake.
None of the big names hold their lisence here Count. Only the smaller independants do, and they are legally obliged to pay out on bets they have layed or their lisence will be revoked.
Fair enough TTK you’d know far more about the industry than I would.