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.