Bookmaker's Shameless Palpable Error Ruling

I recently argued that bookmakers shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near their customers private information. The Gambling Commission doesn’t trust them yet allows them to be custodians of our personal data.

There have also been incidents recently where bookmakers have acted with impunity to their customers regarding the rules. They expect to get away with it because it appears there isn’t a great deal can be done to stop them.

The latest example was with 888sport where they quoted 100/1 for Samsonova to win the US Open tennis.

She won her early matches. The general quote for her came down to around 9/1 to 12/1.

At this point 888 decided that the bet was void and informed clients that this was the case, returning the stake money.

Here is the ruling

From time to time, errors may occur in our offer, acceptance or settlement of a bet, or payment of winnings (whether due to human error or technical malfunction) (each an “Error”).

We may void any bet that is in any way affected by an Error

A non-exhaustive list of Errors are as follows:

(i) where the odds or terms of a bet are misstated

(ii) where a bet is accepted by us in error instead of being rejected………

(v) where there is a “palpable error” or “obvious error,” being where we erroneously offer or accept odds that are materially different from those available in the general market or clearly incorrect given the chance of the event occurring.

Their argument is that the odds were misstated, or it was a “palpable error” which doesn’t really hold up. I looked up her traded prices on the exchange and the bulk of the business was at 150-160, so people taking 100/1 could have received a better deal on their prices.

Bet365 were quoting 80/1, so in traditional odds terms the 100/1 was only one click away from there. There really is no evidence that the odds were misstated or a palpable error.

What is also interesting with this case is that they decided to void the bet three matches into the tournament. At what point did they decide that an error had been made? When was it flagged up as an error? How was it flagged up as an error when they had been happy to take the bet and sit on it for days?

If she lost in any of the first three rounds this ‘serious’ pricing error would never have come to light and so the bet would have settled as a loser. Punters wouldn’t have been returning in their droves, quoting a palpable error and demanding their money back.

The timing of the voiding is interesting not just because of the question of how they suddenly decided the bet was taken in error. Samsonova would have been around 9/1 to 12/1 at the time of voiding but let’s use 9/1 as it helps to understand the numbers.

At the start, 888sport were quoting 100/1. The price is now 9/1, so they simply void it. A bet that was 100/1, available on the exchange at 150, on offer elsewhere at 80/1 is now 9/1, so what a wonderful way to remove your liability. Clearly there was no error in their pricing but by waiting until later in the tournament they invoke the voiding rule and remove all liability.

It’s despicable and this is what punters should do about it.

Complain to 888sport. Refuse any offer of goodwill free bets. Stop betting with them because they are not worthy of your business. My next suggestion was going to be to demand a reference to take to IBAS. Even that turns out not to be so simple.

The Gambling Commission requires betting companies to offer an alternative dispute resolution (ADR). 888Sport doesn’t use IBAS, but an organisation called eCogra. Looking up eCogra on the Gambling Commission website it tells us that the outcome is non-binding.

Don’t let that put you off. The process is to file a complaint at support@888.com where they will acknowledge receipt within 24 hours. They then have 14 business days to review it and make a decision. If you still aren’t happy then you can take it to manager@888sport.com but by this time you can contact eCogra to make your complaint at ecogra.org.

If I’d bet £10 on Samsonova it would have been worth £101 at the time of voiding, using odds of 9/1 (101 / 10 x £10). That would have been the cash-in value, so what 888sport have done is given you £10 for a bet that was worth £101.

Their argument could be that you should be glad you got your money back as the bet turned out to be a loser but that would be disingenuous.

Consider a scenario where she got to the final and won the first set and traded at 1/5 and only then did 888sport notice how palpable the error was. Your bet would now be worth closer to £850 to cash out but they could still remove the liability by giving you your money back. If she then lost the next two sets how would you feel about getting your £10 back when in fact you never even had a chance of being paid £1010 and you might have hedged the position for a loss? Voiding bets is simply a way or removing liability.

This is where eCogra comes in. File a complaint against 888sport and make a claim for a goodwill payment. In the case of a £10 bet, make a claim for £101.

What’s the point? Well, they could find in your favour and suggest the bookmaker makes goodwill gesture payments. The least they should do is to award you fair value for your bet. How could a bookmaker complain about that? If they are doing things like this on a regular basis, most people won’t bother to complain so they usually just get away with it. If 888sport ignore it, then it’s a demonstration that they knowingly used the voiding rule to avoid liabilities.

Alternatively, eCogra could defend the bookmaker, let them hide behind rules that aren’t applicable to this situation and show themselves up as not being fit for purpose and generally siding with the bookmaker in an indefensible situation.

That would highlight the need for a massive overhaul in the betting industry. The gambling review is still rolling on and previously I made a case for a central database so bookmakers can’t have access to our pertinent bank details but this would increase an argument for a gambling Ombudsman, somebody who could be truly independent but could also regulate bookmakers in a manner whereby a company can’t make up rules as it wishes but has to abide by industry wide regulation.

Time to stand up to these bookmakers. The odds are already massively in their favour. They can’t be allowed to decide which bets they’re not going to pay out on as well. Scold yourself if you ever place another bet with 888sport.

I’ve just set up a dedicated twitter account, @trickybets1 (somebody got there ahead of me), so please post any useful information or progress reports on there.