Harsh?

MrRed · Post by **MrRed** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 9:37 am

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... y-out.html

steelfix1 · Post by **steelfix1** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 9:46 am

Yes, like it say's he kept his part of the bargain, it's their software and their fuck up, pay the man and good luck to him, be lucky to
get it though, bad enough when a fruity fucks up for £70 jp or more.

HornyNick · Post by **HornyNick** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:55 am

I can see both sides of the argument: But why didn't EVERYBODY win who was playing at the time? And if there was some bug in this program, then surely every single punter who'd put their €20 (or other amount) in and lost would be due a refund too? After all, Eurobet must have 'won' with all those unsuspecting customers? What steps have they taken to contact each and every single player at that time to refund their monies too?...... Probably NONE WHATSOEVER! Gambling is a double edged sword - both for 'the player' and the operative company. They have taken no steps to restitute any losers from this claimed 'software error' - in other words they only want a "Eurobet has to win all the time" outcome from this and any other game.
Give the man his money!

Quote from the DM comments section. He got it bang on!

Roll_With_It_Russ · Post by **Roll_With_It_Russ** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:21 pm

coral eurobet have a track record of software errors, I remember the error they had on the hi lo they had on the fobts when they first came out, some lady won somthing like £30k in shop and they never paid out claiming software fault.

I rate his chance of getting paid very slim, only because i've never heard of a case ruled in favor of the player.

deano8177 · Post by **deano8177** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:37 pm

I've had Essex leisure refuse to pay me before, they claimed it was down to a software fault and they wasnt far wrong. Never see a penny of it. I recon if I took it to a small claims court I'd of won. And hope this bloke dose, good luck.

maverick69 · Post by **maverick69** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:26 pm

Depends how good his lawyer is, you want las vegas attorney David chessnoff. He would get you paid in full. hes the best there is. got paris hilton off, got bruno mars off. he gets everyone off. im sure he would do it for the right price

harry2 · Post by **harry2** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:31 pm

Coral's have got billions of pounds to defend this case. Welshing bastards. They are too arrogant to admit wrongdoing.

maverick69 · Post by **maverick69** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:48 pm

id settle out of court for somewhere between 80 and 200k

HornyNick · Post by **HornyNick** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 6:58 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... litch.html

he lost.

betchrider · Post by **betchrider** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 7:50 pm

Every empty a software error?

Roll_With_It_Russ · Post by **Roll_With_It_Russ** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:00 pm

"Pet shop worker Mr Venturi said he felt 'cheated' after a High Court judge found that a computer virus was covered under the website's terms and conditions so they could refuse to pay out."

well his lawyer was not very good if they did not even define the terms which the case was judged on, poor programming/testing of the games is not a virus.

Roll_With_It_Russ · Post by **Roll_With_It_Russ** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:02 pm

Further more the best arguement to put forward would be the stake the player actually paid should be split across the winning combinations, so should of recieved a 6th of the winnings.

tommya · Post by **tommya** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:14 pm

Would they haven given his money back if he had lost it due to a software fault i think not.

maverick69 · Post by **maverick69** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:56 pm

Bookies are just cunts end of, if anyone scams the shit out of them good luck to them. They are a virus on our towns and cities and ruin ppls lives. Yes you have the argument that you have your own mind, but the vulnerable will always loose they money . There is an argument both way

Roll_With_It_Russ · Post by **Roll_With_It_Russ** » Sat Jun 16, 2012 2:14 am

Yeah I think one of the high court rulings covers not returning people who lose, its the calvert v william hill case. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvert_v._William_Hill

ruled that though he lost to a bookmaker he was selfexcluded the money was not needed to be returned because he would of lost anyway... the ruling is wrong in my opinion but I guess hills chucked enough money at the case and got the point of them being a pathalogical problem gambler in there and it got through as agood enough reason.

I can't see how anyone could expect to get losing bets returned under any circumstances if self exclusion does not count, though I suppose it could be open to abuse.

The only way a loser can get the funds returned from a organistion is if the bet underage as far as i'm aware.