Ladbrokes Not Paying Out

Nozebleed

Lads i tried to collect a winning bet from yesterday. appearantly the horse won but was subsequently disqualified after 20 mins or so..now a good few of us were sitting in the pub and we all stuck a few quid on the horse..some collected their winning immedietely after the race but when i went in today inwas told it was disqualified and that my bet was a loser..where do i stand in this case?

Gringo180

Ladcrooks have to be the worst bookie out there and in todays game thats saying a lot. Surely first past the post they should be paying?

CrankyHaus

Appeal to head office, they usually want to keep punters gambling.

The current position of the courts seems to be that there is no legal obligation on casino's to pay out, even if the winnings are fair. See the case of Sayyed Mirwais against D1 Casino last year. Horse racing might be different but if the winner was fairly disqualified then it wasn't a winning bet.

Reputable Rog

Nozebleed wrote: »

Lads i tried to collect a winning bet from yesterday. appearantly the horse won but was subsequently disqualified after 20 mins or so..now a good few of us were sitting in the pub and we all stuck a few quid on the horse..some collected their winning immedietely after the race but when i went in today inwas told it was disqualified and that my bet was a loser..where do i stand in this case?

Tell them you're going to object to the renewal of their licence in the District Court.

ASOT

Hopefully you get payed out op. I take it the horse was Winklemann? Jockey weighed in2 stone light which is mental.

engiweirdo

Nozebleed wrote: »

Lads i tried to collect a winning bet from yesterday. appearantly the horse won but was subsequently disqualified after 20 mins or so..now a good few of us were sitting in the pub and we all stuck a few quid on the horse..some collected their winning immedietely after the race but when i went in today inwas told it was disqualified and that my bet was a loser..where do i stand in this case?

It's scummy behaviour but not unexpected from that crowd to be honest. Don't think you have a leg to stand on however. FPTP I think is kind of a courtesy/promotional type offer and they can always default to "rules of racing".

BumperD

Google Ladbroke guardian newspaper some interesting cases in last 12 months including cancelled bets

You’ll see what you’re dealing with

posturingpat

Officially a loser, your friends got lucky id say and collected prior to the horse getting thrown out.
If youre a regular they might pay you as a gesture of goodwill but if not its tough luck.

Francie Barrett

First Past the Post (FPP) Rules
All bets placed on UK and Irish horse racing will be settled on First Past the Post AND the official result.

First Past the Post: The immediate result after the race has been completed (see Exceptions below)
Official Result: Announced at the "weigh-in" on the day, after any Steward's Enquiries and/or objections have been considered. If a winner is disqualified after the official result is announced, the disqualification will not affect the settlement of bets.

If it was a UK/Irish race, then yes according to their rules, you should be paid out first past the post.

posturingpat

Was this the horse that didnt have his saddle cloth and jock weighed in 31lb lower?
Some mess.

Cherry_Cola

Was that the one in which Holy Tiber was put into first from second?

ASOT

posturingpat wrote: »

Was this the horse that didnt have his saddle cloth and jock weighed in 31lb lower?
Some mess.

Absolute ****show it was. Winklemann was the horse in the first at Chelmsford yesterday.

posturingpat

Francie Barrett wrote: »

First Past the Post (FPP) Rules
All bets placed on UK and Irish horse racing will be settled on First Past the Post AND the official result.

First Past the Post: The immediate result after the race has been completed (see Exceptions below)
Official Result: Announced at the "weigh-in" on the day, after any Steward's Enquiries and/or objections have been considered. If a winner is disqualified after the official result is announced, the disqualification will not affect the settlement of bets.

If it was a UK/Irish race, then yes according to their rules, you should be paid out first past the post.

Think Jockey weighed in wrong so wouldve been disqualified before Official result.

ceadaoin.

They don't have to pay out. It's in their rules. There's no point trying to dispute it

First Past the Post: The immediate result after the race has been completed (see Exceptions below)
Official Result: Announced at the "weigh-in" on the day, after any Steward's Enquiries and/or objections have been considered. If a winner is disqualified after the official result is announced, the disqualification will not affect the settlement of bets

The exceptions where First Past the Post does not apply and bets are only settled according to the official result are:


A selection taking the wrong course
A selection carrying the wrong weight or the jockey failing to weigh-in

Francie Barrett

ceadaoin. wrote: »

They don't have to pay out. It's in their rules. There's no point trying to dispute it

That'd explain it alright.

Nozebleed

ASOT wrote: »

Hopefully you get payed out op. I take it the horse was Winklemann? Jockey weighed in2 stone light which is mental.

yeh i had 25e/w at 10/1. 5 of my mates had a 10r on him and all got paid. i walked in this morning to be told no..its a loser and that the other shouldnt have been paid. its disgraceful..


surely i should get my stake back at least??

the_pen_turner

Why would they pay out. The jockey was cheating (intentionally or accidentally) .

I wouldn't be surprised if they went after the money paid out to recoup it.

Get your money back maybe but full payout no

Scott Tenorman

Ladbrokes are totally in the right here.
Do people honestly expect a bookie to pay out if a jockey weighs in light?

ceadaoin.

the_pen_turner wrote: »

Why would they pay out. The jockey was cheating (intentionally or accidentally) .

I wouldn't be surprised if they went after the money paid out to recoup it.

Get your money back maybe but full payout no

The money paid out online would definitely have been recouped. It's only the fact that the OPs mates left with the money ASAP with no way to get it back that it's being written off. Think about it OP, would you accept being told that you weren't getting paid out if you had backed the official winner and that they were instead paying out on a horse that didn't run and win the race fairly?

Nozebleed

ceadaoin. wrote: »

The money paid out online would definitely have been recouped. It's only the fact that the OPs mates left with the money ASAP with no way to get it back that it's being written off. Think about it OP, would you accept being told that you weren't getting paid out if you had backed the official winner and that they were instead paying out on a horse that didn't run and win the race fairly?

look im not looking to be paid out at this stage...just looking for my stake back. in fairness i would have thought the horse would be classed as a non runner and stake refunded..if they werent going to pay out.

ceadaoin.

Nozebleed wrote: »

look im not looking to be paid out at this stage...just looking for my stake back. in fairness i would have thought the horse would be classed as a non runner and stake refunded..if they werent going to pay out.

It wasnt a non runner though, it started the race and was later disqualified. Anyway, if you keep at it and annoy them enough without being a dick they might give you your money back, or a free bet for the value. It's worth a try!

Scott Tenorman

Nozebleed wrote: »

look im not looking to be paid out at this stage...just looking for my stake back. in fairness i would have thought the horse would be classed as a non runner and stake refunded..if they werent going to pay out.

You backed a loser, why should you get your money back?

Gringo180

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

You backed a loser, why should you get your money back?

Because he backed a horse that had zero chance of winning even if it was first past the post. Thats not a fair bet. No punter had any knowledge the jockey was going to weigh in over 2 stone lighter. He should be given his stake back imo.

Scott Tenorman

Gringo180 wrote: »

Because he backed a horse that had zero chance of winning even if it was first past the post. Thats not a fair bet. No punter had any knowledge the jockey was going to weigh in over 2 stone lighter. He should be given his stake back imo.

That is the jockeys fault, not the bookies

Gringo180

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

That is the jockeys fault, not the bookies

Nor the punter. Whos more to gain from giving the money back? Exactly, the Bookie, because said punter will be back to there establishment to gamble again.

Scott Tenorman

Gringo180 wrote: »

Nor the punter. Whos more to gain from giving the money back? Exactly, the Bookie, because said punter will be back to there establishment to gamble again.

The OP wanted to collect the horse as a winner, that didn't work so now they want their stake back. Far from having zero chance of winning (as you said) this would be a zero chance of LOSING.

This from a horse winning that weighed in 2 stone light FFS that they have paid out on to some punters who managed to collect before the weigh in. I don't see why they SHOULD pay back the stake. They may to so as a courtesy but they shouldn't have to.

Nozebleed

lads thanks for all the comments..i appreciate the feedback.

its obvious to me that ive been cheated of my money..who exactly has cheated me of my money is another question. imo ladbrokes should acknowledge that by returning my stake which i was placing with them in good faith.

NaiveMelodies

Nozebleed wrote: »

lads thanks for all the comments..i appreciate the feedback.

its obvious to me that ive been cheated of my money..who exactly has cheated me of my money is another question. imo ladbrokes should acknowledge that by returning my stake which i was placing with them in good faith.

Bollix pal.
Horse was a guaranteed loser with the 2 stone aboard. Pick better, win better.

Morgans

Truths:
a) Ladbrokes are the worst of them all
b) Unfortunate **** happens
c) You were not cheated by anyone
d) Stranger more unlucky **** happens to punters frequently
e) You do not deserve a refund
f) Appealing it will do nothing cos of a) and c)
g) You'll be stronger when you take this one on the chin

lemush

Gringo180 wrote: »

Because he backed a horse that had zero chance of winning even if it was first past the post. Thats not a fair bet. No punter had any knowledge the jockey was going to weigh in over 2 stone lighter. He should be given his stake back imo.

Absolute bollox. The bet is a loser and righty so.

mirwillbeback

Love the clowns on this forum whose only contribution is to give pretentious answers as though they wouldn’t feel aggrieved themselves.

Mikedrop

The horse lost a weight about 1f into the race, so when the race started the bet could have been a winner.

Happy4all

Nozebleed wrote: »

lads thanks for all the comments..i appreciate the feedback.

its obvious to me that ive been cheated of my money..who exactly has cheated me of my money is another question. imo ladbrokes should acknowledge that by returning my stake which i was placing with them in good faith.

Yöu haven't been cheated. Them the rules. Your mates got lucky getting paid on FFP rule prior to disqualification which over rules that.

Having said that, ladbrokes are the worst by a mile and I avoid like the plague.

The Talking Bread

That horse wouldn't have won if the saddle cloth hadn't slipped. He looked freakishly too comfortable on the run in.Don't feel over done out of money. If the bookies don't pay out, disputing it will make f all difference here, especially with Ladbrokes, Bet365 etc.

Saying you have been cheated out of money is the worst mentality to have in gambling. You aren't putting money in the bank here when you throw a score at Geraldine behind the counter and get a piece of paper back. You stake your money with terms and conditions. One of the main conditions is that the horse actually wins...........

The horse didn't win

The Talking Bread

mirwillbeback wrote: »

Love the clowns on this forum whose only contribution is to give pretentious answers as though they wouldn’t feel aggrieved themselves.

There is a difference between feeling aggrieved/disappointed that you chose the wrong bookie to lose your bet with this time than feeling "cheated out of my money"........

pugw

mirwillbeback wrote: »

Love the clowns on this forum whose only contribution is to give pretentious answers as though they wouldn’t feel aggrieved themselves.

+1 if they had paid out the first couple of lads you’d imagine they would have honoured it as a gesture of good will!
Walk up and down outside the shop with a placard starting your case at lunchtime today and I’d say they might be more accommodating.

Mongfinder General

mirwillbeback wrote: »

Love the clowns on this forum whose only contribution is to give pretentious answers as though they wouldn’t feel aggrieved themselves.

I saw a bookies get smashed up for **** like this

The Talking Bread

Gringo180 wrote: »

Because he backed a horse that had zero chance of winning even if it was first past the post. Thats not a fair bet. No punter had any knowledge the jockey was going to weigh in over 2 stone lighter. He should be given his stake back imo.

The horse had as much chance as any (relatively speaking) when the race started. Jockey and horse were abiding by the rules then and punters knew this. The saddle only slipped during the race.

All sports have rules to determine winners.

It would be great to get a free bet back, but to EXPECT the bookies to be obliged to hand you back cash and say "listen you didn't know your horse/jockey was going to break the rules so it's not your fault" is laughable attitude

Gringo180

lemush wrote: »

Absolute bollox. The bet is a loser and righty so.

Your a clown would you say the same if you had a tonne on it my bollock$ would you.

The Talking Bread

pugw wrote: »

+1 if they had paid out the first couple of lads you’d imagine they would have honoured it as a gesture of good will!
Walk up and down outside the shop with a placard starting your case at lunchtime today and I’d say they might be more accommodating.

I am sure they will :D:D:D:D

F*cking hell!

You do realise the guys behind the counter have zero control over this in a firm like Ladbrokes. You would look like a pathetic eegit.

Morgans

Anyone suggesting that the OP has a leg to stand on hasn't got a clue what they are taking about.

Bookies paying out both in fptp and official results is relatively new. Even with the most liberal bookies (and Ladbrokes are the worst) you would not have a double result for the wrong weight being carried. Imagine how open to abuse that would be.

Thinking that you were cheated by the bookies or the jockey is ludicrous and those suggesting to appeal or object to the bookies licence renewal are doing you no favours.

The only people effectively cheated in this story is the bookies.

Morgans

Gringo180 wrote: »

Your a clown would you say the same if you had a tonne on it my bollock$ would you.

Doing no favours to the OP. Doesn't matter how much he had on. Everyone likes to win when they place bets. He would have more chance getting his friends to chip in and give him his stake back.

The Talking Bread

Gringo180 wrote: »

Your a clown would you say the same if you had a tonne on it my bollock$ would you.

Question, did you see the race? The horse clearly ONLY won because the rules were broken?

ASOT

The Talking Bread wrote: »

The horse had as much chance as any (relatively speaking) when the race started. Jockey and horse were abiding by the rules then and punters knew this. The saddle only slipped during the race.

All sports have rules to determine winners.

It would be great to get a free bet back, but to EXPECT the bookies to be obliged to hand you back cash and say "listen you didn't know your horse/jockey was going to break the rules so it's not your fault" is laughable attitude

The jockey was hardly abiding by the rules he weighed in two stone light. So I understand where the op is coming from feeling cheated.

Gringo180

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Question, did you see the race? The horse clearly ONLY won because the rules were broken?

Im not disputing the rules were broken. But this was neither the punters fault nor the bookies. So why should the punter be out of pocket and the bookie be up due to a freak accident?

Bubbaclaus

How has this clearly losing bet resulted in 4 pages of comments? Fecking hell.

The Talking Bread

Gringo180 wrote: »

Im not disputing the rules were broken. But this was neither the punters fault nor the bookies. So why should the punter be out of pocket and the bookie be up due to a freak accident?

Like a horse being spooked and falling at the last when 10 lengths ahead........... that is freakish also.

You are betting on the horse winning. Winning means abiding by the rules, same as all sports.

It really is that simple

Gringo180

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Like a horse being spooked and falling at the last when 10 lengths ahead........... that is freakish also.

You are betting on the horse winning. Winning means abiding by the rules, same as all sports.

It really is that simple

Ah come on will you. Theres falling and theres weighing in 31lbs lower. My point is he has placed a bet that he has ZERO chance of getting a return on going by the rules. How is that fair?

The Talking Bread

ASOT wrote: »

The jockey was hardly abiding by the rules he weighed in two stone light. So I understand where the op is coming from feeling cheated.

You don't even kno the details of hat happened here so I am not sure you should be commenting!

The jockey was abiding by the rules, everything was perfect until about a furlong from the start when the weight cloth accidentally slipped (horse now at this point disqualified - rest of the race void)
If the horse had came second it would have been disqualified also.

The horse only hosed in because it was not handicapped fairly.



Put it this way, what if you ere on a 2/1 favourite and that horse lost by a length to this horse because of the fact that horse unfairly won?

Would you settle that as a loser?

Boxcar_Willie

Are Ladbrokes going to persue the punters who collected on this horse in the 20mins before it was disqualified ?
I wouldn't think so ...
My local shop pays "Double Result" - 1st past the post and official result.

lemush

mirwillbeback wrote: »

Love the clowns on this forum whose only contribution is to give pretentious answers as though they wouldn’t feel aggrieved themselves.

Anyone with the slightest clue about the rules wouldn’t be aggrieved. It’s the people who part with their cash whilst clearly knowing **** all about the game that are the clowns.