There have been many instances when payment was refused or rescinded.
Although the first is a few years old, it still fits the bill. The punter placed a wager on three World Cup games in which the chosen team would score at most three goals. The odds seemed very favorable, so the punter questioned the numbers but was assured by his slip that the odds were correct. The bet was successful, and the punter could collect his winnings. He was offered an amount approximately eight times what he should have. This is the old excuse. They need to be corrected.
The second bet is on the European Cup Finals. The unlucky punter placed a treble bet on three teams: each team to win, correct scores, and three teams to win to NIL. Anyone familiar with football betting knows this bet should have been rejected. It was, however, accepted by the website, with odds of nearly 3.500/1. The bookmaker was paid PS70.00. The bookmaker explained that the bet had been “placed in error.” You will not notice that the stake was “placed in error.” The punter didn’t have a leg to stand on.
Considering the odds of winning are only PS300.000, this next story of hard luck is quite unbelievable. The punter was able to accumulate six teams. Spread across different leagues. Surprisingly, the six of them were all successful. Oh, joy. But only for a short time. His betting slip had some odds that were transposed for specific matches. The clerk accepted the bet, as punters can’t write their odds on betting slips. The punter was only awarded PS19.00, even though the bookmakers admitted it was their fault. Checking your betting slip before asking for a price is a good idea.
Revert to the Euros from last year. It’s not good for England or the punter who placed PS5.00 on England winning 2/1. The odds are a mouthwatering 4,000/1. The odds were something other than what our punter would accept as fact. They were correct, he was assured. England obliged him, and he was eager to bank PS20,000. He didn’t get what he deserved. He was paid 8/1 despite having another betting slip with identical odds.
The punter who placed a 1,000,000/1 football wager on PS1.00 was unlucky. The false coin was used to enter his selections. He didn’t get paid.
These situations could all have been avoided because the bookmakers had staff that knew what they were doing. They had received proper training.
Recent events have led me to believe that if one or two of these unfortunate men had the fortitude to go to court, they could have won. It might be the end of days when bookmakers call squeal “wrong chances given.” Small Claims Courts may be busier in the future. These are my thoughts.
