Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

How will Paddy Power get anyway with this?

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,553 ✭✭✭✭ Copper_pipe


    He opened a 2nd account


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 565 enzo roco


    He opened a 2nd account

    Did it say that in the article?
    And if he did, how come they allowed him to deposit?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,245 ✭✭✭ myshirt


    Paddy Power don't have to pay out on ANY bet if they wanted, they just have to give back the money. Clearly they wouldn't have a business if hey followed this line, but make no mistake they do not need to pay out. That's why they​ love the guys going in with the hit and hope accumulator aswell.


  • Site Banned Posts: 880 whiteshorts


    He opened a 2nd account

    Doesn't say anything about that in the article? :confused:
    Paddy Power don't have to pay out on ANY bet if they wanted, they just have to give back the money.

    Not a great way of doing business though.
    IBAS will rule in his favour as the mistake was with Paddy Power internal limits and nothing the punter did.

    Saw some bloke in Paddy Power won €225k for a €12.50 stake last Saturday,
    4 correct scores.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,340 ✭✭✭ GhostyMcGhost


    He opened a 2nd account

    It clearly shows 1 bet for £7k not multiple bets


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,553 ✭✭✭✭ Copper_pipe


    49f587b893ebe3456c21be2825bda7c1.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,399 ✭✭✭ Nonoperational


    It's bad form, but Paddy Power are relentless with closing duplicate accounts and voiding bets made on duplicate accounts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭ Division


    In this case Paddy Power is right.

    Read that small print!


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,189 ✭✭✭✭ Shanotheslayer


    It's bad form, but Paddy Power are relentless with closing duplicate accounts and voiding bets made on duplicate accounts.

    That's not bad form it's breaknig their T&C's there is obviously a reason the account was banned.

    Don't understand why he didn't just go to a different bookie.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,379 ✭✭✭ CeilingFly


    enzo roco wrote: »
    Did it say that in the article?
    y

    Its the Daily Mail - a muck sheet of a newspaper. To give the true information from both sides of an argument is well beyond them.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭ Division


    It clearly shows 1 bet for £7k not multiple bets

    He opened account 1.

    He set a deposit limit for himself on account 1... probably because he has a gambling problem or doesn't trust himself.

    He then opened account 2. (this is where he breached the T&Cs).

    He placed at least 2 bets for £10,000 at odds worse than were available at other bookies (this reinforces my opinion that he has a gambling problem or is very foolish).

    Paddy power can't be seen to allow problem gamblers to get around self imposed deposit limits. Maybe legally they can't.

    This guy made many mistakes.

    Paddy power were correct.

    Everyone assumes they voided the bet after it won. Where is the proof?

    Everyone jumps on the bandwagon to beat the bookies with a stick because they can't beat them by betting so they are resentful.

    He shouldn't have done what he did, for many reasons.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭ Reuben Faithful Storyteller


    Agree his erratic behaviour and clearest and most common of breach (2nd account openings) suggests a clear intention to break rules.

    This is exacerbated further by running to the papers without proper consideration of the facts possibly, to them, and in turn the public.
    It could (possibly) leave him, or even the publishers liable for a defamation claim. The story appears misleading.

    These publisher have a certain responsibility to fact-check, as proven recently by Melania's settlement from the Mail.


  • Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭ Division


    Agree his erratic behaviour and clearest and most common of breach (2nd account openings) suggests a clear intention to break rules.

    This is exacerbated further by running to the papers without proper consideration of the facts possibly, to them, and in turn the public.
    It could (possibly) leave him, or even the publishers liable for a defamation claim. The story appears misleading.

    These publisher have a certain responsibility to fact-check, as proven recently by Melania's settlement from the Mail.

    PP won't go after the guy, it would be a terrible idea.

    The rag papers should be forced to print a retraction if it can be phrased that PP helped a problem gambler not gamble and they take responsible gambling seriously and will do their best to help their customers, ect. Anything else and its better just to let the story die as the people love to shoot down the big bad bookie who took their money. Bettors have the memory of a goldfish for this type of thing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,929 ✭✭✭ jacool


    I would like to know if they returned ?7000 or ?10,200?
    The second bet was a loser, but as it was made at the same time, should have been voided by the same rule.
    Anyone know what he got back?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,418 ✭✭✭ Wheety


    Did they also cancel his bet on Barcelona to beat Juventus?


  • Registered Users Posts: 784 ✭✭✭ todolist


    CeilingFly wrote: »
    Its the Daily Mail - a muck sheet of a newspaper. To give the true information from both sides of an argument is well beyond them.
    Daily Mail website is the best newspaper website by a country mile.First site i go to every time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 111 ✭✭ iiHyPeRize


    Division's explanation is likely 100% what happened. PP themselves can't comment on an individual's account publicly as it would breach his data protection rights. So this guy was able to go crying to the newspapers who picked up the story and didn't bother to even do a single fact check and just publish everything he was saying as fact. I particularly love the bit in the paper where he says he was saving for a house.. As if he's going to get a loan or mortgage from anywhere if he's depositing 10k into betting account.

    If he created a new account while having a deposit limit on another, he was breaching several terms and conditions. It likely was spotted in real time, but when it's spotted - the bets would have been cancelled and the money returned. A non story here, he just made a big deal out of it.


Advertisement