Skip to main content

shoddy bookmaker alert

bwin have been hammered for closing accts and poor customer service over the years. They even have a rule buried deep in their T&Cs prohibiting accounts from employed at other firms. But this one has to take the cake. The punter wins €2000 and then the bookmaker says 'sorry, we shouldn't have offered these bets to you in the first place'.

There's no comeback for this. The punter has done nothing wrong, and bwin have remote staff based in Australia trading live on AFL and NRL matches. If that is not deliberately targetting Australian clients to bet in-running, then I don't know what is. Conveniently hiding behind rules to suit themselves, they know damn well what they are doing is wrong, but also that the Australian government will never prosecute a firm based overseas anyway. Every UK bookmaker offers betting in-running to Aussies, the only firm who restricts is Betfair because they hold an Australian licence.

read the thread from OLBG - bwin shafts punter

Pure scam and punters should never let bookies get away with pathetic actions like this. Let's see if the gaming authority in Gibraltar has any balls....

UPDATE 17/4/09 - it appears as if Bwin have caved in and will pay the punter out after both the Gibraltar authorities and SportsbookReview were contacted to get involved.

Bwin still remain a bookmaker to steer well clear of. They have an enormous range of markets but with ridiculously high margins, and won't hesitate to cut you off if you dare to win a few times...

Comments

  1. SBR have a good record at resolving disputes with BWin; I'd be inclined to recommend it be sent their first rather than Gibraltar.

    ReplyDelete
  2. cheers Darryl, will make sure the punter knows about that option.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla

Racing has a Ponzi scheme - and the fallout will be enormous

When the term ' Ponzi scheme ' is mentioned these days, the names Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford instantly spring to mind. The pair of them ran multi-billion dollar frauds (US$60bn and $8bn respectively) that destroyed the lives of thousands of investors who had put their life savings into a 'wonderful' investment strategy. How so many people were sucked into the scheme is baffling to those on the outside. The lifestyle, the sales pitch, the success stories of the early investors - I suppose it all adds up. So where does this link to racing you ask? A prominent Australian 'racing identity' this week has been reported to have lost access to a bank account with punters' club funds of $194m in it. Firstly - is there a worse term for anyone to be labelled with that 'racing identity'? It ALWAYS ends up meaning shonky crook! Secondly - who the hell has a punters' club with an active bankroll in the tens of millions? It simply can't be done. T