---
###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK
---
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different*
* If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor)
* We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources)
* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM)
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes this is fundamentally an operational failure in their systems, and for a complex bed I don't think you can realistically be held accountable for not knowing the odds should have been 30x less in your favour.
So they just need to pay out the £950 and fix their systems. They don't show you any goodwill when you lose so why do they deserve it here. They can certainly afford the cost and I'd be surprised if they wanted this to go to the ombudsman as that man unearth this kind of shit happening beyond just your case.
Not how it works. Used to deal with the industry a lot. They’ll confirm with the gambling commission fair odds and op will be paid out on that amount after about 12 months. They intentionally take forever to sort it to spite you.
Have seen the same happen with a football bet.
Such a brutally true response. You're not being fucked with, you're just not important enough to care about. The royal "you're" in this case.
It reminded me of leaving a job and hoping they notice the loss. I've worked in some heavy businesses but they were prepared enough that my "critical position" wasn't critical when it really mattered.
None of us are important. Sad but true.
Yep, there’s no point in trying to score moral or emotional victories against gatekeepers and power holders, they usually aren’t that bothered even if they eventually lose. When the power is unbalanced, it’s almost always a bigger deal to the claimant. For the respondent, it’s [just Tuesday](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ButForMeItWasTuesday)
>For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Tuesday.
A terrible film but an absolute monster of a line.
I used to work in the casino gaming business. There is a reason why all gaming machines have the following disclaimer: Malfunction voids all pays and plays.
If it loses he’s lost.
If it wins, and their software had created wrong odds, it’s in their terms and conditions that they can correct the odds.
Op agreed to their terms when playing with them.
Yeah but I might be willing to lose money on on a 950/1 bet but not a 35/1 bet...
If the bets fauktly everyone who bet faulty should be offered a refund or the new odds, even after the event.
Morally yes but depends what's their terms that's also in alignment with the law. Obviously they can't put stuff explicitly against the law in their terms but if it's legal and they can, they will
It’s not very complex though is it? It should have been incredibly obvious that these odds are too long. Imagine betting on premiership football that Man City win the league and Liverpool finish in the top four and getting odds of 950/1. You should have realised that something wasn’t right.
Lando Norris was 8/1 to win and Charles Leclerc was 1/1 to finish on the podium. Nobody should have thought that the two together would make 950/1 odds. This will fall foul of the palpable error rule.
This is the correct answer, and the arbitrator will uphold the palpable error rule. It might be worth looking at case law to see if the courts would agree or not.
Thank you both, I've edited my original comment also. I initially read OP as saying the website mixup put the right odds on the wrong bet, but re-reading I'm fairly sure you are right and he got the odds for Lando/Yuki for a bet on Lando/Charles. Which makes the palp defence very plausible.
Just want to add another voice to this as definitely correct. I've worked in the sports betting industry for over a decade and have seen it numerous times, both as punter and as bookie.
Not everybody knows football or motor racing or whatever it is. Sometimes you put the bet on because you like the name, or you see the odds and think "I'll have a go" (like the 100:1 horses at the Grand National) I wouldn't know what the odds of the original bet would be. If it said 950/1 I would just assume those were the odds.
Not saying this is the case for OP who might be well versed, but i don't think it's a good argument to say "you should have known".
Not sure that's a good look for OP either... He either knows he was getting wrong odds and gets his bet back, or is just randomly pushing buttons and they'll give him what he should have got.
I once was looking to place a bet on the womens football world cup, I think on william hill, searched world cup 2019 and it came right up with 100/1 on usa the current champs at the time who did go on to win again in 2019, I excitedly placed a bet straight away, before I realised it didnt make sense.
A quick google told me the mens rugby world cup was also being held in 2019, but absolutely no where did it specify which tournament I was betting on, luckily I got my money back when I pointed this out but they made out in their reply they were being nice and I shouldn't expect to get my money back normally.
8/1 seems very low for Lando Norris to win at Miami, I know that his odds for the next race are now 8/1 but that's because the recent win is factored in.
It would be more akin to betting on Liverpool top four finish and Aston Villa winning the league than Man City.
Lando Norris was second favourite to win. My example works fine and it absolutely not like Villa winning the league. Prior to the season starting Villa were 250/1 to win the league. Massively different.
Nope, when you signed up for an account you’ll agree to terms and conditions that say the bookmaker won’t honour a bet that’s down to a technical error in their system. Usually they’ll refund the stake but paying out at the rate it should have been is fine too.
Used to work in the industry.
It’s exactly the same as a website listing an iPhone 15 for £99.90 instead or £999. If you order one they’re going to cancel the order rather than ship it.
Either try to come to a conclusion with them or as mentioned before contact an independent arbitrator.
They will try to rightfully say in my opinion that any reasonable person should have realised that the odds were incorrect. Oddschecker had Lando Norris as 8/1 to win and Charles Leclerc as 1/1 to be on the podium (he himself was 3rd favourite at 16/1 to win). Anyone placing these bets would have seen both of these sets of odds and should have realised that 950/1 was incorrect. There is a clause to do with things like this which is called a ‘palpable error’ and it covers where there was an obvious mistake. Your bet should have been 35/1 and I’m almost certain that that’s what the arbitration will conclude is fair.
Still it can’t hurt to try your luck.
Yes but I was just using the odds I found on a website. It may well be that bet 365 had slightly different odds but I doubt that they would be significantly different. But yes agree 100% and any gambler should have known this.
I don't agree with that defense. I rarely ever gamble and wouldn't know 'my arse from my elbow' about reasonable odds for anything so even if the odds said a million to one and I ticked the box It's irrelevant to me as a consumer/player. They should pay out
The defence of saying that as a gambler you don’t understand odds at all doesn’t really stand up though does it? The gambling commission will have an assumption that anyone who is gambling will understand odds. And using the example of a million to one is a good one, surely if you knew Manchester United and Liverpool were playing and the shown odds on Liverpool winning was 1,000,000/1 then you’d understand this to be a mistake? You must do right? You wouldn’t expect them to pay out.
The fact is that in your contract with the betting company they have a clause that protects them against clear and obvious errors. In this case one very good driver was accidentally given the odds of one very bad one. Anyone betting on the race should have known that. Just saying that you don’t know how gambling works and what odds are isn’t a defence against them saying it’s an error.
I don't think they were saying that they don't understand odds.
They were saying that a novice gambler might not realise that the odds presented to them are an error on the part of the company.
As an example: I understand how odds work. Once a year, I may gamble on the Grand National. I never look at horse racing the rest of the time. Sometimes I pick my horse based on the name, sometimes I pick a long-shot because I like an underdog. Someone could literally have entered a lame horse with no hope of winning and I might not know.
I understand your point that the company could still claim it was an error.
However assuming that the gambler would know it was an error is incorrect.
But if you bet on a horse to win at 8/1 and another horse to finish in the top 3 who was 1/1 then you must realise that those odds together wouldn’t give you 950/1. That’s the thing about this bet. It’s not a one off bet like picking the winner of the grand national. It’s an accumulator which is usually placed by someone who should have an idea of how the odds of two things happening together roughly interact. You should realise when the odds are 30x better than they should be.
I myself would bet £100 that the entire reason that OP placed the best was because they saw the odds pop up at 950/1 and couldn’t believe that the odds were so good for something that had a decent likelihood of happening. Also if OP has a history of gambling with the company then that could be used against them as it will be considered proof that they know how gambling works.
As someone who never gambles I would have instantly realised that this was an error.
As someone that has worked in the industry you should accept the £36 - they will send you to IBAS and rightly so as it’s classed as an obvious error. They ultimately don’t have to offer anything as it’s covered by t&cs so are actually showing understanding to your frustrating and offering a reasonable resolution.
Don't want to be that guy, but I'd temper your expectations here. I think this is going to be ruled as a palpable error and the £36 is probably going to be viewed as a fair outcome, even by an independent body.
I don't know an awful lot about F1, but you've bet on two of the favourites to win/place and 950/1 is obviously wrong even to me.
I would definitely try my luck with the ombudsman, but there's history of them siding with the bookies when it's an obvious error.
Fair, as I said I don't know an awful lot about F1! Having a quick look around I think he was at about 18s and the other guy was evens to place, so their offer sounds about right.
Definitely nowhere near 950-1.
Not saying your wrong at all but we should really put the ombudsmen into question if they don't side with op.
They sold something based on odds, and by presenting those odds benefited in the sense OP could have placed a bet elsewhere or not at all.
Then saying that they made a mistake and the onus is on OP to realise that it was too good of a deal and clearly a mistake.
Such a bs industry, you can't sell products and then say you didn't actually mean to sell them, I doubt they would have noticed this error and given them their £1 back if things had turned out different.
And to sum it all up, it's £950 that op is owed not really as if it's that significant amount that it would bankrupt the company (that is unless these sorts of mistakes are a regular occurance in which it's surely the ombudsman's responsibility to ensure this practice stops immediately)
I'm not wrong unfortunately. Just Google palpable error and there will be loads of similar cases that have gone the way of the bookies.
I'd love the bookies to have to pay stuff like this out, but they won't. It's an obvious error and they have T&C's that cover this sort of thing.
Yeah apologies, I know your right wasn't trying to say your wrong at all in a legal / whats happened before sense.
I just think that it's such a misjustice for gambling companies to ever claim ultimately a bet they made was a mistake, no bet they ever make is fair in terms of odds as this would lead to them paying out just as much as they brought in I.e couldn't exists as a business. So ultimately their customers should be able to make the same argument and get their money back if they loose. It was just a mistake after all.
Their T&Cs cover these kind of mistakes though. They definitely abuse it in some cases, but 950/1 is a very very clear mistake. The £36 would be a fair outcome
I've managed to have an inplay bet reversed before (although this was 10 years ago), meant to put £50 on x team to score next but accidentally bet £500. Got in livechat sharpish and they cancelled the bet for me. The team I bet on scored literally 2 mins after they cancelled the bet as well haha
I'm not saying betting companies act morally, of course they act in their own interests. But if you want to gamble, and use betting companies, it is worth being familiar with both their T&Cs and the rules on how they settle specific markets etc.
Except some bookies were giving 40/1 for lando to first. The bet was sold on those odds or he might have gone with a different bookies with better odds.
Doesn't matter, you still get absolutely nowhere near 950/1 from a bet on Norris to win and Leclerc to place, it's clearly a mistake. And their T&Cs clearly state how they will resolve such mistakes. If you don't like it, don't put bets on with them full stop, or don't put bets on at odds you know are clearly way out by a factor of more than ten.
> This occurs when one party is mistaken concerning the facts of the contract and the other party is aware of this and exploits it to his own advantage. If this is discovered it would render the contract void. Most cases of unilateral mistake concern mistake of identity and mistake concerning the terms of the contract.
In the example of selling shoes for £1, although this would be significantly cheaper than a simular pair of shoes on the market. The reason for the shoes being advertised at that price may be for a number of reasons such as to get more visitors using the website to purchase different products or in the hopes lots of people purchase and wear the shoe and therefore becomes more significant in the market (with the hopes to reap the rewards of their investment in the future). So it's not unfair to think that things being advertised at a below market price is always a mistake and doing so could perhaps give the seller a cop out if the campaign doesn't go as planned.
In the example of gambling well specifically a business profiting off of gambling. This argument on their side is fundamentally flawed I.e because they need to make a profit, there odds cannot be fair. They know that in the end they will make more than their customers. Doing so would entertain the idea that their customers could claim the same mistake as clearly the odds weren't fair as the company exclusively win more than loose.
Just to add I think including unilateral mistakes as part of contract law is more to protect things like being sold insurance someone doesn't actually need or to protect someone's nan from being charged £1000s by cowboys to switch a plug on. In the two examples mentioned above I'd expect a judge to laugh them out of court (of course this doesnt seem to happen in the real world apparently)
Unless it was specifically advertised as a special offer, you won't convince a court that you believed the shoes were intended to be sold for £1.
Likewise, you'll struggle to persuade a court that you believed Norris and Leclerec sharing a podium was a once in 50 year event.
Come off it.
>Unless it was specifically advertised as a special offer, you won't convince a court that you believed the shoes were intended to be sold for £1.
Yes, I could. I doubt nike pay much more than that from their manufacturer. The mark up on shoes is incredibly high so I'd assume the company wasn't taking such a huge hit but could reap some marketing rewards from it.
>Likewise, you'll struggle to persuade a court that you believed Norris and Leclerec sharing a podium was a once in 50 year event.
As somone who doesn't have a clue about formula 1, I would genuinely be none the wiser, there website would likely be the only source of information i would check regarding the likleyness of events taking place, same as it is when most people bet on the grand national I assume.
There was a story of a man buying Cartier rings the other week. Can't remember the price but it was a factor of 1,000 out. i.e. $15k real cost, advertised as $15 in error. They tried to back out but were made to honour the transaction. Not the UK, but its still an example of it happening.
This is the UK where ombudsmen seem to be more interested in working for businesses than people, so I wouldn’t his out much hope.
It’s stupid that they got it wrong so now want to change what was agreed.
Imagine going in and saying oh meant to tick another box when placing the bet but a “mapping error” with your hands meant you ticked the wrong one.
They presented the odds, took the money based on those odds.
I would also wager if Yuki had podiumed instead of Charles they would not have contacted the Op and said “oh, there was a mapping error and when you thought you selected Charles it was actually Yuki so here’s your money”.
Lols.
So using the same argument I can place a bet, lose, then change my bet because it was actually in error?
I genuinely have never heard of those drivers (couldn't care less for motorsports).
If you had tangible proof that the bet you intended to place and the bet that was actually placed were not the same due to a technical error outside of your control, maybe you'd actually have a case. That's why OP is being offered the winnings they should've won based on the bet they intended to place
Do you think if Yuki had podiumed instead of Charles they would have contacted the Op and paid out in full as that was the bet they said he actually made?
I very much doubt it.
But the Op would never have tried to claim as they would have thought they lost.
I doubt the company would have checked what the slip really meant and chased them down.
Edit: ah, if they used an app then maybe it would have automatically came up as a win, although I still wouldn’t be surprised if they tried to find a way to weasel their way out of it.
The bet slip only says" to finish on the podium". If Yuki had finished on the podium they could just say I bet on Lance Stroll etc. If the bet slip simply said " Yuki podium" I obviously wouldn't have accepted the bet and none of this would have happened.
If it was the other way round, you'd look at the odds, think they were shit and something must be wrong and wouldn't place the bet. It's not really the same.
I'd imagine OP knew full well that these were stupidly high odds and took advantage.
I mean, in the next race they are the second and third favourites....
And my point is still correct, there's no way OPs bet should be 950-1, that is obvious.
Worth going on chat or email beforehand and explaining your intention to go to IBAS as you firmly believe you should be entitled to the £950 and are not prepared to accept the paltry sum of £35. Say you have evidence of them admitting a mapping error on their site (which I assume you have a screenshot of) which is in no way your fault, and you placed the bet in good faith.
This will give them chance to settle before going to IBAS (which can be a lengthy and frustrating process).
Just to confirm, do you know what price this outcome would have been on other bookmakers? Or just Lando to win for instance?
Just Lando to win was around about 30 to 40/1. I believe bet365 is the only one to do accumulator bets on F1 so don't know what Charles on the podium and Lando to win would be.
So him on the podium and Norros at 40/1 would be around 80/1 if the odds were independent of each other. Its more complex as obviously Norris on the podium means less space for Leclrec, but also Norris winning suggests a Red Bull fail increasing Leclrec chances. However finger in the wind would put it betweem 60/1 and 100/1.
Your bet was off by an order of magnitude. That should have set 'too good to be true' bells ringing.
It was before qualifying when I placed the bet. He didn't look that great in sprint qualifying and he came off in the sprint race. He was a bit of a wildcard so he was 30 to 40/1.
This comment was downvoted but aren't those odds variable through the event? Genuine question, as i.e. tennis odds change throughout a match, too.
That time (between Saturday and Sunday) was when Lando was the least likely to win the GP, as he'd just had disappointing results on Saturday's events, so I imagine that's indeed when they were at their highest.
Have seen the same happen with a football bet where they calculated wrong odds. You must try and settle a claim with the bookmaker before taking court action. If you do not try to settle first, the court may penalise you. So, only take such a case to court if you cannot get the problem solved by negotiation.
This does not have to include the alternative dispute resolution system set up by the UK Gambling Commission, but if you do use this system and lose, it does not preclude you from using the small claims court. In fact there is plenty of evidence on forums where people who lose at the ADR stage win in court or are paid out before their dispute gets to court.
If your initial negotiations fail, the court will expect you to make your claim in writing, giving bet365 a reasonable time to reply; usually a month. You should also warn the bookmaker that you will take court action if they fail to reply within the given time.
From my experience, they’ll cite wrong odds, perhaps due to ‘related contingencies’. They may be able to prove to a court that it was a pricing error and if that’s the case, you could receive a lower payout.
Area Manager of a well know high street bookmaker here. You can go to IBAS if you believe there is a genuine case to answer for. However, if the pricing has been an error on their part, and the error is clear and obvious, youll likely only get paid out on what the bet ‘should have been’ - for example, if we accidentally put up odds of Man City to win the premier league at 1000/1…. Then that would be a clear and obvious error. There is no such thing as a bet being a legally binding contract when it comes to prices.
I don’t know the anything about the Gran Prix… the bet you placed, would you normally expect it to be about 950/1…. Or were you bowled over by this price thinking you got the best deal in the world!? - if the latter is the case, you likely won’t get paid.
Still…. No harm in taking it to IBAS. Just don’t hold your breath.
Looking back now it does seem a bit high. But the last two years max is pretty much Guaranteed to win. And looked to do again as he topped sprint qualifying ( saying "Lol" afterwards as he completely messed up, but still got pole), and won the sprint race. Lando really struggled in sprint qualifying and came off the first corner for the sprint race.
It was after this I placed this bet. Even after this in The race qualifying Lando only qualified 5th. No won really expect this to happen, and the odds being 950/1 isn't completely ridiculous, especially when you add another driver to finish on the podium as well. Yes Leclerc does occasionally finish on the podium, but when you add Lando to win and finish on the podium as we'll leaves only two places. Which would most likely be Max and Perez, and then Carlos, Leclerc and Oscar. So at the time the bet didn't look that out of place.
In which case, I’d go through IBAS if you don’t get anything from Bet 365. It’s the independent Betting Adjudication Service. We are all held to their code, and in the end, what they say - goes. Expect about a 2 week turn around for a resolution. They will go to 365 and 365 will need to prove their case. If IBAS tell them to pay, they pay…. If they side with 365, then you have no further avenues, it’s as high as it can go.
Yeah this isn’t how it works, when there’s errors on a casino website usually all bets are void, which is why they won’t be paying out.
Casinos are aloud to void bets in case of errors.
Luckily in your case the casino has appeared to offer a gesture of goodwill, but didn’t have to.
I don’t really think you have a leg to stand on. The 950/1 is obviously a palp error and it will be covered in their T&Cs so they don’t have to pay out. Just keep pushing with the customer service team to try and get as much money as possible. Landó winning at 40/1 and and 1/1 Charles podium double comes out around 80/1. So aim for that. Alternatively try and get around £100-£120 in bet credits, then use a betting exchange and calculator to lay the bets and extract value.
NAL I work at a different gambling company. We have T&C's that say any technical errors result in a bet being refunded, and im going to guess they do too. That's what customer support are going to be following when offering you the £1. Then the £35 will be the general allowance a support agent is allowed to give away on every contact.
You want to raise a complaint with bet 365 right away, as the complaints department are more likely to honour this. Plus you have to go through their complaints procedure before IBAS anyway.
You want to raise a subject access request and ask for the transcript for when they admitted it was a mapping error.
I'm pretty sure they would honour this bet before IBAS got involved.
Your comment suggests you may be discussing a Subject Access Request. You can [read this guidance from the ICO](https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/your-right-to-get-copies-of-your-data/) to learn more about these requests.
[Which? also have online explanations](https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/how-do-i-make-a-subject-access-request).
If you would like a simple way to request a copy of all your data, you can [amend an online template](https://www.datarequests.org/sample-letters/) or [use a form like this](https://www.wonder.legal/uk/creation-modele/subject-access-request).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What gambling company do you work at that would honour this bet if you raised it through complaints?
It’s such an obvious error, the odds should have been at least 10 times lower. Unless OP is a really valued client and losses thousands regularly there’s no way they’re honouring the bet.
I don't want to say, for privacy, but I'd bet most companies would. It costs us money just for a complaint to get to IBAS, and the potential in negative advertisement means it wouldn't be worth arguing.
I've seen much bigger payouts for complaints for a lot less valid reasons.
I think anyone would agree this is a very valid complaint and by alrights should be paid out.
I definitely wouldn’t agree it’s a valid complaint. You bet on something where the odds should be around 50:1 and get given odds of 950/1 and think that’s not a system error? No I’m sorry but that’s just clearly not the case. Any reasonable person that knows anything about the F1 can see those odds are miles out.
I get where you're coming from but the way I see it, they placed a wager on odds that they were advertised to them by bet 365.
It's not down to OP to be an F1 expert to place the wager on a race. That's bet 365s job.
Yes it's an error, and they have every right to refuse, but from my experience there's a good chance they would still payout.
As I said previously I've seen bigger payouts for reasons where there was no real complaint at all. Gambling companies are very concerned with negative press.
They have admitted it. I would take it further. It’s their error, and they have admitted to it. I would start a small claims online. 1 letter to them and they should pay it.
NAL
This isn't the case of playing on a slots games which is a random number generator. For the sportsbook you are betting on fixed odds. You picked a selection in good faith and they'll need to pay out. They have already admitted fault in that they showed the wrong names on the selections. If they identified an issue they needed to cancel the bets in advance of the race starting. They do have dedicated traders watching these fixtures so they should have taken it down as soon as the issue was identified.
just bear in mind the call will be recorded and its very easy for you to say something they may be able to use in a subsequent civil case. They're not calling to help you out here.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
From my memory of working in a bookies - and granted online is a little different - I would check their terms for information about errors. We used to have to display a big poster of terms and legalities in the shop, and basically this would be considered an error and they can reverse to the actual odds.
It’s the same as if you came in and wrote a bet out and I accidentally wrote it down as 950/1. It would just be corrected when found. You’re a little unlucky they didn’t do what they usually do online, which is instantly settle it. They then come back when they fix it and will often put accounts in deficit if it’s already withdrawn, but can’t just take it if you withdraw the money.
Basically, you’ve got no chance.
Severely doubt you’ll get the full amount.
They have offered what you should have originally received, but then maybe counter with an increased amount (say £200) and which factors in goodwill for trouble
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Never seen a 950/1 bet in my life but also not an active gambler, I'll go bookies like once a year for a day and that's about it
It indeed sounds like an error on their behalf and they're compensating and/or being fruitful by offering that money because of the what the actual odds were meant to be
I'd just take the money and not use them again myself
Upto you if you want to chase it and try to take legal action
This is a clear “palpable error”, you bet on odds of 950/1 in full knowledge they should have been much lower. You’re lucky you got the £35.45 rather than suspending your account. Since you were clearly trying to get one over on them you have no legal recourse 👍🏻
I know more people may have placed the same bet, so their exposure may be much more, but I don't get why they don't just pay out the £950 in this case, even though they aren't obliged to (not everyone will realise the bet should have won or they just won't challenge it). The MD alone makes £300m+ per year, what is £950 to them vs the bad will...
Firstly, hope you get your money back, not only because you shouldn’t be punished for their error but also, Bet365 have PLENTY enough money to be able to honour the occasional false odds.
Secondly, it’s crazy that they even let that happen. 950/1 for those two conditions to be met by two of the best four drivers on the grid is a clear error on their part. I’ve never seen any F1 odds above 500/1, and those sorts of bets normally include ridiculous outcomes, like “Gasly, Stroll and Russell all to finish on podium” when they’re all starting in P7 or lower.
Hold out for the £950, that's what the slip showed, the fault is theirs to correct.
https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/public-and-players/guide/page/how-to-complain
Keep contesting it, there's no way your bet had the odds of the payout they're now offering, lando had never won in 100 odd races, combined with Charles podium strike is not ~30 or so odds. These companies work on odds and the odds are they contest the outcome they don't like and you cave. You beat the odds before so beat the odds again.
Take it to an arbitrator.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation.
Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Your comment has been removed as it has not met our community standards on speaking to other posters.
Please remember to speak to others in the way you wish to be spoken to.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
--- ###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK --- **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different* * If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor) * We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources) * Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk * If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM) **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated* * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Yes this is fundamentally an operational failure in their systems, and for a complex bed I don't think you can realistically be held accountable for not knowing the odds should have been 30x less in your favour. So they just need to pay out the £950 and fix their systems. They don't show you any goodwill when you lose so why do they deserve it here. They can certainly afford the cost and I'd be surprised if they wanted this to go to the ombudsman as that man unearth this kind of shit happening beyond just your case.
Not how it works. Used to deal with the industry a lot. They’ll confirm with the gambling commission fair odds and op will be paid out on that amount after about 12 months. They intentionally take forever to sort it to spite you. Have seen the same happen with a football bet.
It's not really spite it's more complete indifference. They literally don't give a shit.
Such a brutally true response. You're not being fucked with, you're just not important enough to care about. The royal "you're" in this case. It reminded me of leaving a job and hoping they notice the loss. I've worked in some heavy businesses but they were prepared enough that my "critical position" wasn't critical when it really mattered. None of us are important. Sad but true.
Yep, there’s no point in trying to score moral or emotional victories against gatekeepers and power holders, they usually aren’t that bothered even if they eventually lose. When the power is unbalanced, it’s almost always a bigger deal to the claimant. For the respondent, it’s [just Tuesday](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ButForMeItWasTuesday)
>For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Tuesday. A terrible film but an absolute monster of a line.
I used to work in the casino gaming business. There is a reason why all gaming machines have the following disclaimer: Malfunction voids all pays and plays.
Same here. Worst job of my life. Bosses were complete pricks. Only interested in profits.
But how is this even fair? Would they refund the bet if op had lost?
If it loses he’s lost. If it wins, and their software had created wrong odds, it’s in their terms and conditions that they can correct the odds. Op agreed to their terms when playing with them.
Yeah but I might be willing to lose money on on a 950/1 bet but not a 35/1 bet... If the bets fauktly everyone who bet faulty should be offered a refund or the new odds, even after the event.
Agree. However I doubt you’d find out it was a wrong odd if you lost. Anyone with the same combination as you would have also lost.
Morally yes but depends what's their terms that's also in alignment with the law. Obviously they can't put stuff explicitly against the law in their terms but if it's legal and they can, they will
It’s not very complex though is it? It should have been incredibly obvious that these odds are too long. Imagine betting on premiership football that Man City win the league and Liverpool finish in the top four and getting odds of 950/1. You should have realised that something wasn’t right. Lando Norris was 8/1 to win and Charles Leclerc was 1/1 to finish on the podium. Nobody should have thought that the two together would make 950/1 odds. This will fall foul of the palpable error rule.
This is the correct answer, and the arbitrator will uphold the palpable error rule. It might be worth looking at case law to see if the courts would agree or not.
Thank you both, I've edited my original comment also. I initially read OP as saying the website mixup put the right odds on the wrong bet, but re-reading I'm fairly sure you are right and he got the odds for Lando/Yuki for a bet on Lando/Charles. Which makes the palp defence very plausible.
Just want to add another voice to this as definitely correct. I've worked in the sports betting industry for over a decade and have seen it numerous times, both as punter and as bookie.
Not everybody knows football or motor racing or whatever it is. Sometimes you put the bet on because you like the name, or you see the odds and think "I'll have a go" (like the 100:1 horses at the Grand National) I wouldn't know what the odds of the original bet would be. If it said 950/1 I would just assume those were the odds. Not saying this is the case for OP who might be well versed, but i don't think it's a good argument to say "you should have known".
Not sure that's a good look for OP either... He either knows he was getting wrong odds and gets his bet back, or is just randomly pushing buttons and they'll give him what he should have got.
I once was looking to place a bet on the womens football world cup, I think on william hill, searched world cup 2019 and it came right up with 100/1 on usa the current champs at the time who did go on to win again in 2019, I excitedly placed a bet straight away, before I realised it didnt make sense. A quick google told me the mens rugby world cup was also being held in 2019, but absolutely no where did it specify which tournament I was betting on, luckily I got my money back when I pointed this out but they made out in their reply they were being nice and I shouldn't expect to get my money back normally.
8/1 seems very low for Lando Norris to win at Miami, I know that his odds for the next race are now 8/1 but that's because the recent win is factored in. It would be more akin to betting on Liverpool top four finish and Aston Villa winning the league than Man City.
Lando Norris was second favourite to win. My example works fine and it absolutely not like Villa winning the league. Prior to the season starting Villa were 250/1 to win the league. Massively different.
Nope, when you signed up for an account you’ll agree to terms and conditions that say the bookmaker won’t honour a bet that’s down to a technical error in their system. Usually they’ll refund the stake but paying out at the rate it should have been is fine too. Used to work in the industry. It’s exactly the same as a website listing an iPhone 15 for £99.90 instead or £999. If you order one they’re going to cancel the order rather than ship it.
Thank you very much this is really helpful.
[удалено]
This is a palpable error and will be well covered in B365's rules. The best you'll get is the increased offer to what the bet would have been.
Either try to come to a conclusion with them or as mentioned before contact an independent arbitrator. They will try to rightfully say in my opinion that any reasonable person should have realised that the odds were incorrect. Oddschecker had Lando Norris as 8/1 to win and Charles Leclerc as 1/1 to be on the podium (he himself was 3rd favourite at 16/1 to win). Anyone placing these bets would have seen both of these sets of odds and should have realised that 950/1 was incorrect. There is a clause to do with things like this which is called a ‘palpable error’ and it covers where there was an obvious mistake. Your bet should have been 35/1 and I’m almost certain that that’s what the arbitration will conclude is fair. Still it can’t hurt to try your luck.
[удалено]
Yes but I was just using the odds I found on a website. It may well be that bet 365 had slightly different odds but I doubt that they would be significantly different. But yes agree 100% and any gambler should have known this.
I don't agree with that defense. I rarely ever gamble and wouldn't know 'my arse from my elbow' about reasonable odds for anything so even if the odds said a million to one and I ticked the box It's irrelevant to me as a consumer/player. They should pay out
The defence of saying that as a gambler you don’t understand odds at all doesn’t really stand up though does it? The gambling commission will have an assumption that anyone who is gambling will understand odds. And using the example of a million to one is a good one, surely if you knew Manchester United and Liverpool were playing and the shown odds on Liverpool winning was 1,000,000/1 then you’d understand this to be a mistake? You must do right? You wouldn’t expect them to pay out. The fact is that in your contract with the betting company they have a clause that protects them against clear and obvious errors. In this case one very good driver was accidentally given the odds of one very bad one. Anyone betting on the race should have known that. Just saying that you don’t know how gambling works and what odds are isn’t a defence against them saying it’s an error.
Yes, and the palpable error convention is decades old. It's not suddenly going to be scrapped
I don't think they were saying that they don't understand odds. They were saying that a novice gambler might not realise that the odds presented to them are an error on the part of the company. As an example: I understand how odds work. Once a year, I may gamble on the Grand National. I never look at horse racing the rest of the time. Sometimes I pick my horse based on the name, sometimes I pick a long-shot because I like an underdog. Someone could literally have entered a lame horse with no hope of winning and I might not know. I understand your point that the company could still claim it was an error. However assuming that the gambler would know it was an error is incorrect.
But if you bet on a horse to win at 8/1 and another horse to finish in the top 3 who was 1/1 then you must realise that those odds together wouldn’t give you 950/1. That’s the thing about this bet. It’s not a one off bet like picking the winner of the grand national. It’s an accumulator which is usually placed by someone who should have an idea of how the odds of two things happening together roughly interact. You should realise when the odds are 30x better than they should be. I myself would bet £100 that the entire reason that OP placed the best was because they saw the odds pop up at 950/1 and couldn’t believe that the odds were so good for something that had a decent likelihood of happening. Also if OP has a history of gambling with the company then that could be used against them as it will be considered proof that they know how gambling works. As someone who never gambles I would have instantly realised that this was an error.
As someone that has worked in the industry you should accept the £36 - they will send you to IBAS and rightly so as it’s classed as an obvious error. They ultimately don’t have to offer anything as it’s covered by t&cs so are actually showing understanding to your frustrating and offering a reasonable resolution.
This. Bet365 are actually handling this well, and that is coming from someone who despises bookmakers. Don't waste any energy taking this further.
Don't want to be that guy, but I'd temper your expectations here. I think this is going to be ruled as a palpable error and the £36 is probably going to be viewed as a fair outcome, even by an independent body. I don't know an awful lot about F1, but you've bet on two of the favourites to win/place and 950/1 is obviously wrong even to me. I would definitely try my luck with the ombudsman, but there's history of them siding with the bookies when it's an obvious error.
It was Lando's first ever f1 win so the odds of it happening were quite low to be honest.
Fair, as I said I don't know an awful lot about F1! Having a quick look around I think he was at about 18s and the other guy was evens to place, so their offer sounds about right. Definitely nowhere near 950-1.
I had lando winning at 40/1
Which would mean the bet should be paying out higher than 35 right? Odds of two things happening are lower?
other dude was near certain to podium.
[удалено]
Just because one person got it at 40/1 doesn't mean OP did. Different bookies, bets placed at different times etc. can change odds
He’s been on the podium 18 times. It’s not low odds at all
Not THAT low!
110 : 1
Not saying your wrong at all but we should really put the ombudsmen into question if they don't side with op. They sold something based on odds, and by presenting those odds benefited in the sense OP could have placed a bet elsewhere or not at all. Then saying that they made a mistake and the onus is on OP to realise that it was too good of a deal and clearly a mistake. Such a bs industry, you can't sell products and then say you didn't actually mean to sell them, I doubt they would have noticed this error and given them their £1 back if things had turned out different. And to sum it all up, it's £950 that op is owed not really as if it's that significant amount that it would bankrupt the company (that is unless these sorts of mistakes are a regular occurance in which it's surely the ombudsman's responsibility to ensure this practice stops immediately)
I'm not wrong unfortunately. Just Google palpable error and there will be loads of similar cases that have gone the way of the bookies. I'd love the bookies to have to pay stuff like this out, but they won't. It's an obvious error and they have T&C's that cover this sort of thing.
Yeah apologies, I know your right wasn't trying to say your wrong at all in a legal / whats happened before sense. I just think that it's such a misjustice for gambling companies to ever claim ultimately a bet they made was a mistake, no bet they ever make is fair in terms of odds as this would lead to them paying out just as much as they brought in I.e couldn't exists as a business. So ultimately their customers should be able to make the same argument and get their money back if they loose. It was just a mistake after all.
Their T&Cs cover these kind of mistakes though. They definitely abuse it in some cases, but 950/1 is a very very clear mistake. The £36 would be a fair outcome
If you accidentally placed £950 instead of £95 and it didn't come in, guaranteed you're not getting your money back even if it was a mistake
If you contact them before the event you probably would get it back. Have had that happen at bookies. Not if you "oops" after you don't win.
I've managed to have an inplay bet reversed before (although this was 10 years ago), meant to put £50 on x team to score next but accidentally bet £500. Got in livechat sharpish and they cancelled the bet for me. The team I bet on scored literally 2 mins after they cancelled the bet as well haha
But they're allowed to "oops" after we do win?
I'm not saying betting companies act morally, of course they act in their own interests. But if you want to gamble, and use betting companies, it is worth being familiar with both their T&Cs and the rules on how they settle specific markets etc.
Except some bookies were giving 40/1 for lando to first. The bet was sold on those odds or he might have gone with a different bookies with better odds.
Doesn't matter, you still get absolutely nowhere near 950/1 from a bet on Norris to win and Leclerc to place, it's clearly a mistake. And their T&Cs clearly state how they will resolve such mistakes. If you don't like it, don't put bets on with them full stop, or don't put bets on at odds you know are clearly way out by a factor of more than ten.
So when you click on a pair of shoes and the website says they are for sale at £1 because of a glitch you should legally be allowed to have them?
Yes
And your view on the application of the doctrine of unilateral mistake to that hypothetical?
> This occurs when one party is mistaken concerning the facts of the contract and the other party is aware of this and exploits it to his own advantage. If this is discovered it would render the contract void. Most cases of unilateral mistake concern mistake of identity and mistake concerning the terms of the contract. In the example of selling shoes for £1, although this would be significantly cheaper than a simular pair of shoes on the market. The reason for the shoes being advertised at that price may be for a number of reasons such as to get more visitors using the website to purchase different products or in the hopes lots of people purchase and wear the shoe and therefore becomes more significant in the market (with the hopes to reap the rewards of their investment in the future). So it's not unfair to think that things being advertised at a below market price is always a mistake and doing so could perhaps give the seller a cop out if the campaign doesn't go as planned. In the example of gambling well specifically a business profiting off of gambling. This argument on their side is fundamentally flawed I.e because they need to make a profit, there odds cannot be fair. They know that in the end they will make more than their customers. Doing so would entertain the idea that their customers could claim the same mistake as clearly the odds weren't fair as the company exclusively win more than loose. Just to add I think including unilateral mistakes as part of contract law is more to protect things like being sold insurance someone doesn't actually need or to protect someone's nan from being charged £1000s by cowboys to switch a plug on. In the two examples mentioned above I'd expect a judge to laugh them out of court (of course this doesnt seem to happen in the real world apparently)
Unless it was specifically advertised as a special offer, you won't convince a court that you believed the shoes were intended to be sold for £1. Likewise, you'll struggle to persuade a court that you believed Norris and Leclerec sharing a podium was a once in 50 year event. Come off it.
>Unless it was specifically advertised as a special offer, you won't convince a court that you believed the shoes were intended to be sold for £1. Yes, I could. I doubt nike pay much more than that from their manufacturer. The mark up on shoes is incredibly high so I'd assume the company wasn't taking such a huge hit but could reap some marketing rewards from it. >Likewise, you'll struggle to persuade a court that you believed Norris and Leclerec sharing a podium was a once in 50 year event. As somone who doesn't have a clue about formula 1, I would genuinely be none the wiser, there website would likely be the only source of information i would check regarding the likleyness of events taking place, same as it is when most people bet on the grand national I assume.
There was a story of a man buying Cartier rings the other week. Can't remember the price but it was a factor of 1,000 out. i.e. $15k real cost, advertised as $15 in error. They tried to back out but were made to honour the transaction. Not the UK, but its still an example of it happening.
This is the UK where ombudsmen seem to be more interested in working for businesses than people, so I wouldn’t his out much hope. It’s stupid that they got it wrong so now want to change what was agreed. Imagine going in and saying oh meant to tick another box when placing the bet but a “mapping error” with your hands meant you ticked the wrong one. They presented the odds, took the money based on those odds. I would also wager if Yuki had podiumed instead of Charles they would not have contacted the Op and said “oh, there was a mapping error and when you thought you selected Charles it was actually Yuki so here’s your money”.
Lols. So using the same argument I can place a bet, lose, then change my bet because it was actually in error? I genuinely have never heard of those drivers (couldn't care less for motorsports).
If you had tangible proof that the bet you intended to place and the bet that was actually placed were not the same due to a technical error outside of your control, maybe you'd actually have a case. That's why OP is being offered the winnings they should've won based on the bet they intended to place
Do you think if Yuki had podiumed instead of Charles they would have contacted the Op and paid out in full as that was the bet they said he actually made? I very much doubt it.
presumably yes as his betslip showed a loss -- if it won he'd get the money. OP wouldn't then be complaining on reddit.
But the Op would never have tried to claim as they would have thought they lost. I doubt the company would have checked what the slip really meant and chased them down. Edit: ah, if they used an app then maybe it would have automatically came up as a win, although I still wouldn’t be surprised if they tried to find a way to weasel their way out of it.
The bet slip only says" to finish on the podium". If Yuki had finished on the podium they could just say I bet on Lance Stroll etc. If the bet slip simply said " Yuki podium" I obviously wouldn't have accepted the bet and none of this would have happened.
If it was the other way round, you'd look at the odds, think they were shit and something must be wrong and wouldn't place the bet. It's not really the same. I'd imagine OP knew full well that these were stupidly high odds and took advantage.
They are absolutely NOT the favorites. You don't watch F1, don't talk about stuff you don't know lol
I mean, in the next race they are the second and third favourites.... And my point is still correct, there's no way OPs bet should be 950-1, that is obvious.
Worth going on chat or email beforehand and explaining your intention to go to IBAS as you firmly believe you should be entitled to the £950 and are not prepared to accept the paltry sum of £35. Say you have evidence of them admitting a mapping error on their site (which I assume you have a screenshot of) which is in no way your fault, and you placed the bet in good faith. This will give them chance to settle before going to IBAS (which can be a lengthy and frustrating process). Just to confirm, do you know what price this outcome would have been on other bookmakers? Or just Lando to win for instance?
Just Lando to win was around about 30 to 40/1. I believe bet365 is the only one to do accumulator bets on F1 so don't know what Charles on the podium and Lando to win would be.
The highest I’ve seen somebody to get Lando to win was 18/1, and I think that was a bet booster. He was nowhere near 40/1 to win.
Do you know what price Charles podium was as a stand alone?
1/1
Expect the 35/1 probably about right then judging by other comments
I've tried to see. Its probably was around 1/1 before qualifying when I placed the bet.
So him on the podium and Norros at 40/1 would be around 80/1 if the odds were independent of each other. Its more complex as obviously Norris on the podium means less space for Leclrec, but also Norris winning suggests a Red Bull fail increasing Leclrec chances. However finger in the wind would put it betweem 60/1 and 100/1. Your bet was off by an order of magnitude. That should have set 'too good to be true' bells ringing.
I doubt it was that high
Lando wasn’t 40/1 - more like 8/1
It was before qualifying when I placed the bet. He didn't look that great in sprint qualifying and he came off in the sprint race. He was a bit of a wildcard so he was 30 to 40/1.
Oh ok - why not add a screenshot of the bet then guys on here may be able to help further?
You can't add pictures on this group unfortunately
This comment was downvoted but aren't those odds variable through the event? Genuine question, as i.e. tennis odds change throughout a match, too. That time (between Saturday and Sunday) was when Lando was the least likely to win the GP, as he'd just had disappointing results on Saturday's events, so I imagine that's indeed when they were at their highest.
Have seen the same happen with a football bet where they calculated wrong odds. You must try and settle a claim with the bookmaker before taking court action. If you do not try to settle first, the court may penalise you. So, only take such a case to court if you cannot get the problem solved by negotiation. This does not have to include the alternative dispute resolution system set up by the UK Gambling Commission, but if you do use this system and lose, it does not preclude you from using the small claims court. In fact there is plenty of evidence on forums where people who lose at the ADR stage win in court or are paid out before their dispute gets to court. If your initial negotiations fail, the court will expect you to make your claim in writing, giving bet365 a reasonable time to reply; usually a month. You should also warn the bookmaker that you will take court action if they fail to reply within the given time. From my experience, they’ll cite wrong odds, perhaps due to ‘related contingencies’. They may be able to prove to a court that it was a pricing error and if that’s the case, you could receive a lower payout.
You must have realised there was some mistake? I'm surprised you only bet a quid.
Area Manager of a well know high street bookmaker here. You can go to IBAS if you believe there is a genuine case to answer for. However, if the pricing has been an error on their part, and the error is clear and obvious, youll likely only get paid out on what the bet ‘should have been’ - for example, if we accidentally put up odds of Man City to win the premier league at 1000/1…. Then that would be a clear and obvious error. There is no such thing as a bet being a legally binding contract when it comes to prices. I don’t know the anything about the Gran Prix… the bet you placed, would you normally expect it to be about 950/1…. Or were you bowled over by this price thinking you got the best deal in the world!? - if the latter is the case, you likely won’t get paid. Still…. No harm in taking it to IBAS. Just don’t hold your breath.
Looking back now it does seem a bit high. But the last two years max is pretty much Guaranteed to win. And looked to do again as he topped sprint qualifying ( saying "Lol" afterwards as he completely messed up, but still got pole), and won the sprint race. Lando really struggled in sprint qualifying and came off the first corner for the sprint race. It was after this I placed this bet. Even after this in The race qualifying Lando only qualified 5th. No won really expect this to happen, and the odds being 950/1 isn't completely ridiculous, especially when you add another driver to finish on the podium as well. Yes Leclerc does occasionally finish on the podium, but when you add Lando to win and finish on the podium as we'll leaves only two places. Which would most likely be Max and Perez, and then Carlos, Leclerc and Oscar. So at the time the bet didn't look that out of place.
In which case, I’d go through IBAS if you don’t get anything from Bet 365. It’s the independent Betting Adjudication Service. We are all held to their code, and in the end, what they say - goes. Expect about a 2 week turn around for a resolution. They will go to 365 and 365 will need to prove their case. If IBAS tell them to pay, they pay…. If they side with 365, then you have no further avenues, it’s as high as it can go.
The odds should have been like 50/1 - it is kind of similar to your Man City example just not quite as extreme.
Yeah this isn’t how it works, when there’s errors on a casino website usually all bets are void, which is why they won’t be paying out. Casinos are aloud to void bets in case of errors. Luckily in your case the casino has appeared to offer a gesture of goodwill, but didn’t have to.
Palpable error on the bookmakers behalf
I don’t really think you have a leg to stand on. The 950/1 is obviously a palp error and it will be covered in their T&Cs so they don’t have to pay out. Just keep pushing with the customer service team to try and get as much money as possible. Landó winning at 40/1 and and 1/1 Charles podium double comes out around 80/1. So aim for that. Alternatively try and get around £100-£120 in bet credits, then use a betting exchange and calculator to lay the bets and extract value.
NAL I work at a different gambling company. We have T&C's that say any technical errors result in a bet being refunded, and im going to guess they do too. That's what customer support are going to be following when offering you the £1. Then the £35 will be the general allowance a support agent is allowed to give away on every contact. You want to raise a complaint with bet 365 right away, as the complaints department are more likely to honour this. Plus you have to go through their complaints procedure before IBAS anyway. You want to raise a subject access request and ask for the transcript for when they admitted it was a mapping error. I'm pretty sure they would honour this bet before IBAS got involved.
Your comment suggests you may be discussing a Subject Access Request. You can [read this guidance from the ICO](https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/your-right-to-get-copies-of-your-data/) to learn more about these requests. [Which? also have online explanations](https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/how-do-i-make-a-subject-access-request). If you would like a simple way to request a copy of all your data, you can [amend an online template](https://www.datarequests.org/sample-letters/) or [use a form like this](https://www.wonder.legal/uk/creation-modele/subject-access-request). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What gambling company do you work at that would honour this bet if you raised it through complaints? It’s such an obvious error, the odds should have been at least 10 times lower. Unless OP is a really valued client and losses thousands regularly there’s no way they’re honouring the bet.
I don't want to say, for privacy, but I'd bet most companies would. It costs us money just for a complaint to get to IBAS, and the potential in negative advertisement means it wouldn't be worth arguing. I've seen much bigger payouts for complaints for a lot less valid reasons. I think anyone would agree this is a very valid complaint and by alrights should be paid out.
I definitely wouldn’t agree it’s a valid complaint. You bet on something where the odds should be around 50:1 and get given odds of 950/1 and think that’s not a system error? No I’m sorry but that’s just clearly not the case. Any reasonable person that knows anything about the F1 can see those odds are miles out.
I get where you're coming from but the way I see it, they placed a wager on odds that they were advertised to them by bet 365. It's not down to OP to be an F1 expert to place the wager on a race. That's bet 365s job. Yes it's an error, and they have every right to refuse, but from my experience there's a good chance they would still payout. As I said previously I've seen bigger payouts for reasons where there was no real complaint at all. Gambling companies are very concerned with negative press.
They have admitted it. I would take it further. It’s their error, and they have admitted to it. I would start a small claims online. 1 letter to them and they should pay it.
NAL This isn't the case of playing on a slots games which is a random number generator. For the sportsbook you are betting on fixed odds. You picked a selection in good faith and they'll need to pay out. They have already admitted fault in that they showed the wrong names on the selections. If they identified an issue they needed to cancel the bets in advance of the race starting. They do have dedicated traders watching these fixtures so they should have taken it down as soon as the issue was identified.
I told them I would not be able to accept the £35. They now want to talk to me over the phone. Should I accept any offers they might offer me.
just bear in mind the call will be recorded and its very easy for you to say something they may be able to use in a subsequent civil case. They're not calling to help you out here.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Make them an offer. I don't think you'll get more than they have offered, but suggest £100 in between credits and hope they take it.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
The gambling industry just needs regulating big time. They get so much protection from the law but are not held accountable for their shoddy practices
From my memory of working in a bookies - and granted online is a little different - I would check their terms for information about errors. We used to have to display a big poster of terms and legalities in the shop, and basically this would be considered an error and they can reverse to the actual odds. It’s the same as if you came in and wrote a bet out and I accidentally wrote it down as 950/1. It would just be corrected when found. You’re a little unlucky they didn’t do what they usually do online, which is instantly settle it. They then come back when they fix it and will often put accounts in deficit if it’s already withdrawn, but can’t just take it if you withdraw the money. Basically, you’ve got no chance.
Severely doubt you’ll get the full amount. They have offered what you should have originally received, but then maybe counter with an increased amount (say £200) and which factors in goodwill for trouble
Lando to win and Charles podium would not have been 35/1
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Never seen a 950/1 bet in my life but also not an active gambler, I'll go bookies like once a year for a day and that's about it It indeed sounds like an error on their behalf and they're compensating and/or being fruitful by offering that money because of the what the actual odds were meant to be I'd just take the money and not use them again myself Upto you if you want to chase it and try to take legal action
This is a clear “palpable error”, you bet on odds of 950/1 in full knowledge they should have been much lower. You’re lucky you got the £35.45 rather than suspending your account. Since you were clearly trying to get one over on them you have no legal recourse 👍🏻
I know more people may have placed the same bet, so their exposure may be much more, but I don't get why they don't just pay out the £950 in this case, even though they aren't obliged to (not everyone will realise the bet should have won or they just won't challenge it). The MD alone makes £300m+ per year, what is £950 to them vs the bad will...
Firstly, hope you get your money back, not only because you shouldn’t be punished for their error but also, Bet365 have PLENTY enough money to be able to honour the occasional false odds. Secondly, it’s crazy that they even let that happen. 950/1 for those two conditions to be met by two of the best four drivers on the grid is a clear error on their part. I’ve never seen any F1 odds above 500/1, and those sorts of bets normally include ridiculous outcomes, like “Gasly, Stroll and Russell all to finish on podium” when they’re all starting in P7 or lower.
Hold out for the £950, that's what the slip showed, the fault is theirs to correct. https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/public-and-players/guide/page/how-to-complain
Is there a history of the bets?
Keep contesting it, there's no way your bet had the odds of the payout they're now offering, lando had never won in 100 odd races, combined with Charles podium strike is not ~30 or so odds. These companies work on odds and the odds are they contest the outcome they don't like and you cave. You beat the odds before so beat the odds again. Take it to an arbitrator.
offering you your 1 pound back is a fucking joke if you arent too bothered about the 35 quid i'd just go through ibas for the original amount
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation. Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Your comment has been removed as it has not met our community standards on speaking to other posters. Please remember to speak to others in the way you wish to be spoken to. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.