Betfred Has Refused to Pay a Punter £189,000 After a Betting Slip Error
A punter made a mistake in his betting slip, and for that, he missed out the chance of winning £189,000 in addition to the £23,000 he actually won.
Namely, Betfred, one of UK’s most popular bookmakers, refused to pay the £189,000 as the punter wrote the wrong name in his six-horse accumulator. The punter now intends to take the case to arbitration IBAS (Independent Betting Adjudication Service) and claim the rest of the money he allegedly won.
Why not also check out:
David Smith, a Loughborough man in his 60s, had in mind a spectacular six-horse accumulator, but instead of including Bialco, he included Bailarico. The problem is that Bialco, the horse he intended to write out won, and the one that he actually wrote Bialarico finished third. All the other five selections in his slip won, Sir Busker (4-1), Pennsylvania Dutch (15-2), Shanroe (9-2), Indian Temple (7-1) and Ardera Cross (40-1).
Now, the punter plans on making his case about the slip, arguing that it was clear that he wanted to include Bialco as there was a “2.15 P” to the wrongly-written Bailarico name. This clears some things up, as Bilaco run the 2.15 pm race at Perth, while Bailarico the 3.40 pm at Goodwood. In addition to this, Smith wrote down Bialco’s odds being offered at the time, not Bialarico’s.
After noticing what he had done, he returned to Betfred’s shop to correct the error. He explained to the shop staff that he clearly wanted to settle the bet on Bialco. But the races had already started, and Bialco had already won, even though Bialarico had not started racing.
Nevertheless, Smith explains now that they have settled the win at £212,000 considering the other horses had won, too. When the slip was referred for authorisation, though, Betfred changed the settlement to £23,000.
A spokesman at Betfred said that Smith had written the wrong name on his slip, a horse running in a race at Goodwood that finished third, so, unfortunately, their rules stated that they would settle on the named selection.
But, Smith said that he was not happy with how Betfred handled the complaint. As a regular at Betfred’s Loughborough shop, he blames the manager, whom he knew well, saying that the bet would have been corrected at the time of being placed if he had been working and checked Smith’s bet as he normally did.
Assisted by an online campaigner for punters, Paul Fairhead, Smith found another essential flaw in Betfred’s rules, stating that the bookmaker will split stakes between two horses if the bet was ambiguous. In that case, Smith should receive an additional payout of circa £90,000.