Bookie refused to give back slip

kellyr4

A friend of mine did a lucky 15 yesterday. First 2 horses won at 5/1 and 8/1 respectively. The 3rd horse backed was called George the Second. He had meant to back another horse in a different race called George Best, but he wrote George the Second on the slip by accident. Anyway George Best was beaten, so my mate handed in the slip to get paid out on the 2 winners from the lucky 15. However, the clerk took the slip and said George the Second hasnt run yet, as he was running in the 8.30 at Lingfield last night. This is when my mate realised he had written down George the Second instead of George Best by mistake. The clerk would not give him back the slip and gave him his winnings for the 2 horses that had won (approx 600 euro)

My mate clearly unhappy with not being allowed the slip back called the head office of the bookies and was given a number in England to ring to lodge a complaint, but this call could only be made this morning.

As fate would have it, George the Second romped home last nite.

He had him backed at 8/1 so this issue is worth alot of money to him.

Does he have a case to get paid his winnings?

Mr E

Don't think so. Thats like putting money on Everton to win against Liverpool, and when it doesn't happen, you go back and say "Oops, I meant to put it on Liverpool".

He'll be more careful in future!

kellyr4

Dont think you got the point. He had the winning horse's name written on the slip.

mack1

He absolutely has a case - you back the horse written on the docket - even if he put George the Second and the time and venue of George Best he is on George the Second - all bookies rules clearly state this, writing the time and venue is immaterial, you back the horse you write on the docket.

I dont understant why the clerk, who pointed out there was 1 runner left on the docket, (a) paid out on it and (b) wouldnt return the docket.

You mention they have a Head Office in the UK - so I assume this isnt a local shop chancing their arm but a larger chain bookies, if so there will be a scan of the docket (an actual picture of it) on their computer system. Give a rough time of when the bet was placed and they will be able to pull up the docket with little bother and they'll settle it.

ErinGoBrath

mack1 wrote:

so I assume this isnt a local shop chancing their arm but a larger chain bookies, if so there will be a scan of the docket (an actual picture of it) on their computer system

My thoughts exactly. Your friend definitely has a case here. If you get no joy from them a registered letter to the MD should help things along nicely.

Chucky the tree

I wouldnt of left the shop without the slip.

Cos88

If this isn't rectified to your friends advantage lodge a complaint with IBAS. If he got around 600 for the 2 winners I'm guessin it was a €10 Lucky 15, which would leave him around €6000 short??

Even though he went to collect + obviously didn't mean to back George the Second he should defeinitely get his money, the jammy fecker! If George Best won at 8/1 you can be sure the bookies wouldn't have payed him out on it, so I don't see why they wouldn't just let the bet stand as it was.

county

Chucky the tree wrote:

I wouldnt of left the shop without the slip.

too bloody right,i would have made a right scene about it

kellyr4

Thanks for your views folks. My mate has made further contact with the complaints board and is pending a decision.

Hope TMB has learned his lesson to read a story properly before making a smart comment....................

CiaranC

Simple human error on the shopgirls part. They'll pay out when they see the error on their system.

Dun laoire

I'm gonna look at it from the bookies point of view.

Your mate was supposed to back George the Best which ran in Hamilton 4.45.

So am i right saying he wrote on his slip the horse the meeting and the time which is all of the above except he put George the Second instead? Now if i was a bookie i'd look at this very very carefully before i pay out because lets be honest here, He CLEARLY meant he wanted George the Best and you know what? They will know that too? You know why? Because you went in to collect before the 8.30.

Hard luck buddy but you have a fight on your hands becuase if i was a bookmaker i'd barr you for life for trying that


I'd say he should aim to get 50% of the total lucky 15 and get out of there beacuse it's your friend thats not honest here.

Edit: There's no point trying to get 50% because he aint gonna get another penny

ErinGoBrath

Did you mate specify where the horse was running and at what time on the slip???

mack1

Dun laoire wrote:

.....He CLEARLY meant he wanted George the Best and you know what? They will know that too? You know why? Because you went in to collect before the 8.30.

Clearly he MEANT this, but the rules are very clear - time & venue mean nothing, you are on the horse you write on the docket - end of story. If it was the other way around and it was clear he MEANT George Best and it won they would NOT have paid and and would be perfectly within their rights not to.

Dun laoire wrote:

Hard luck buddy but you have a fight on your hands becuase if i was a bookmaker i'd barr you for life for trying that

From the story it doesnt seem like he "tried" anything, honest mistake - but either way shouldn't be much of a fight, both sides must adhere to the rules which are very clear on these matters.

Dun laoire wrote:

I'd say he should aim to get 50% of the total lucky 15 and get out of there beacuse it's your friend thats not honest here.

Edit: There's no point trying to get 50% because he aint gonna get another penny

He'll get 100% - guaranteed

Also - I think we read the story differently - his friend is not being dishonest - yes he meant to back another horse but wrote down the wrong one and it won - he got lucky!

Tar.Aldarion

Should get the money, simple as. It was what was written on the docket.
If he had written a horse that didn't exist by accident they would not give him the money because he wrote down the wrong name, same thing.

Dun laoire

Well i hope kelly4 gets back to us with the outcome.

The bookie will surely ask the question as to why he came up before the 8.30 race to collect if the bet was still pending? I think it was a smart move by the chap behind the counter.


Mack1 i'm not a bookie and i'm not siding with anybody here i'm just saying that it wont be as easy as you make it out to be. I hear what you are saying about the meeting and time but in this case becuase of such similarities in the name that this (time and meeting) very piece of info could be of huge importance.

Can you at least understand what i'm trying to say mate?

Tar.Aldarion

But also no basis for it as it doesn't matter what he meant, it is what you write. Think they would have given him the money if the horse he meant to write had won?

dodgyme

That feckin George II beat my horse and last night my horse lost out to a stewarts enquiry in leoparsdstown :mad:

mack1

Dun laoire wrote:

Well i hope kelly4 gets back to us with the outcome.

The bookie will surely ask the question as to why he came up before the 8.30 race to collect if the bet was still pending? I think it was a smart move by the chap behind the counter.

My point is that even if his answer is an honest "well I thought I had backed George Best and was collecting on 2 winners but it turned out I wrote the complete wrong horse, had no intention in the world of backing it - but it won and now I've took you for a wedge - isn't that a funny stroke of luck" they will still pay out.

mack1

Dun laoire - just saw your edit.

I get what you're saying - I'm not trying to rip you down or anything - just giving the OP what is the correct answer according to the rules. While morally you may have a point, his friend is within his rights under the rules to collect all his winnings - fluke or not! I was a bookie for 6 yrs - and while I would be raging if this happened I would still have to pay out, but 6k to a major bookies is nothin anyway!

No hard feelins mate!

Dun laoire

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

But also no basis for it as it doesn't matter what he meant, it is what you write. Think they would have given him the money if the horse he meant to write had won?

Yeah exactly it is what you write and what he wrote was

George the second to win the 4.45 in Hamilton. There was no such thing.



I'l put it to you guys this way.


I was out on the p1ss with about 9 mates and we did the football pools. So we all picked 1 team each and put 3 euro each on it. We checked at half time to see how we were doing and every team was up except one because one lad had picked leeds and another picked wolves who as it worked out were playing each other. So i quickly went into pp to explain the error we made and he rang head office and immediately we were hit with 50% of the stake, so it went from 27euro acca to a 13.50 acca and obviously one team gets scratched. Granted the bet came in and we won a good few quid but we were hit with a 50% penalty for the error.

Dun laoire

mack1 wrote:

Dun laoire - just saw your edit.

I get what you're saying - I'm not trying to rip you down or anything - just giving the OP what is the correct answer according to the rules. While morally you may have a point, his friend is within his rights under the rules to collect all his winnings - fluke or not! I was a bookie for 6 yrs - and while I would be raging if this happened I would still have to pay out, but 6k to a major bookies is nothin anyway!

No hard feelins mate!

Absolutely mack1 no hard feelings lad. If he gets it i will be surprised and i honestly mean that. In fact i'l be gobsmaked

kellyr4

Lads i appreciate your interest in this issue. My mate has lodged a complaint with the bookies Head Office and is awaiting the outcome.

Not sure if he wrote down the time and place on the betting slip. Do you have to for a lucky 15?

Any accusations of him trying to pull a sly one on the bookie is wrong. He honestly meant to back George the Best but, knowing him he would have been reading up on every race going on in the day, somehow he got George the second into his head when he was writing out the slip.

Yes he was very lucky that George the Best was beaten and George the Second won his race but there was no malice involved.

Tar.Aldarion

Dun laoire wrote:

Yeah exactly it is what you write and what he wrote was

George the second to win the 4.45 in Hamilton. There was no such thing.



I'l put it to you guys this way.


I was out on the p1ss with about 9 mates and we did the football pools. So we all picked 1 team each and put 3 euro each on it. We checked at half time to see how we were doing and every team was up except one because one lad had picked leeds and another picked wolves who as it worked out were playing each other. So i quickly went into pp to explain the error we made and he rang head office and immediately we were hit with 50% of the stake, so it went from 27euro acca to a 13.50 acca and obviously one team gets scratched. Granted the bet came in and we won a good few quid but we were hit with a 50% penalty for the error.

If he wrote all that it would be less clear cut.
The name has a greater bearing than the time though. We await the outcome.

Dun laoire

kellyr4 wrote:

Lads i appreciate your interest in this issue. My mate has lodged a complaint with the bookies Head Office and is awaiting the outcome.

Not sure if he wrote down the time and place on the betting slip. Do you have to for a lucky 15?

Any accusations of him trying to pull a sly one on the bookie is wrong. He honestly meant to back George the Best but, knowing him he would have been reading up on every race going on in the day, somehow he got George the second into his head when he was writing out the slip.

Yes he was very lucky that George the Best was beaten and George the Second won his race but there was no malice involved.

Will your mate tell them he meant to back George the best if the question comes up? If not he's being dishonest but thats what he may well have to do.

If it's a case that he didnt write down the meeting and time well then the bookie aint got a chance and will without a shadow of a doubt pay 100% of the stake which luckily for him must be in the range of 6k.

Let us know the outcome kellyr.

mack1

Dun laoire wrote:

I was out on the p1ss with about 9 mates and we did the football pools. So we all picked 1 team each and put 3 euro each on it. We checked at half time to see how we were doing and every team was up except one because one lad had picked leeds and another picked wolves who as it worked out were playing each other. So i quickly went into pp to explain the error we made and he rang head office and immediately we were hit with 50% of the stake, so it went from 27euro acca to a 13.50 acca and obviously one team gets scratched. Granted the bet came in and we won a good few quid but we were hit with a 50% penalty for the error.

You weren't charged a 50% "penalty" for the error - your accum. bet had 2 non-mutually exclusive events, ie 2 teams playing each other, 2 horses in the same race etc.

Depending on the bookies rules there are 2 resolutions AFAIK, some place 100% stake on the first one you wrote down, the other (as seems to be your case, 50% of stake is placed on both outcomes.

Dun laoire

mack1 wrote:

You weren't charged a 50% "penalty" for the error - your accum. bet had 2 non-mutually exclusive events, ie 2 teams playing each other, 2 horses in the same race etc.

Depending on the bookies rules there are 2 resolutions AFAIK, some place 100% stake on the first one you wrote down, the other (as seems to be your case, 50% of stake is placed on both outcomes.

Yeah that must be it:o Didnt actually think of that. Was put into two seperate bets.

Bernard Hopkins

there was a case ruled on in ireland about a year ago,.. where a man wrote the docket wrong and entered a horses name that was running in USA by accident instead of an irish/english race.

he won something like 55,000.

I'll try and find the article, unfortunatly i read it in the newspaper, and not online.
but the situation is very similar.

the punter was favoured in the ruling.

B-Hop

Healio

kellyr4 wrote:

so my mate handed in the slip to get paid out on the 2 winners from the lucky 15. However, the clerk took the slip and said George the Second hasnt run yet, as he was running in the 8.30 at Lingfield last night. This is when my mate realised he had written down George the Second instead of George the Best by mistake. The clerk would not give him back the slip and gave him his winnings for the 2 horses that had won (approx 600 euro)

If he handed in the bet then he has accepted payment on it. In which case the clerk will definitely not give it back to him. i.e. When he was told the other horse was running later, he had the chance to take his slip back but from the story above the offer was declined and payment was accepted on george the best.

TheBigLebowski

Why didn't he take his winnings and put it on the horse that was running later. Would that not have had the same effect as an accumulator where one bet roles over into another?
I bet he was probably happy enough to take his winnings when he realised the error cos he didn't fancy George II in the later race and is only complaining now cos it won...

jellybaby21

kellyr4ha wrote:

Not sure if he wrote down the time and place on the betting slip. Do you have to for a lucky 15?
Yes he was very lucky that George the Best was beaten and George the Second won his race but there was no malice involved.

you do not have to write the time and meeting for ANY bet once the name of the horse or dog can clearly be read. It is difficult sometimes to read peoples writing.
My guess on this is that he handed the clerk in the docket and said ' here there are 2 winners on that'
I would say the clerk told him that there was still a horse to run on the docket so it couldn't be paid out yet.
He must have argued with the clerk that there was two winners on it and that was it.
A bookmakers is not going to hold back money from you if you have rightly won it because it will only cause trouble for them in the long run.
Out of interest was this a small bookmaker or a big one??

Bernard Hopkins

TheBigLebowski wrote:

Why didn't he take his winnings and put it on the horse that was running later. Would that not have had the same effect as an accumulator where one bet roles over into another?
I bet he was probably happy enough to take his winnings when he realised the error cos he didn't fancy George II in the later race and is only complaining now cos it won...

he has already paid for the inclusion of "George the Second" on his betslip. why would he want to pay again ?

Please tell us the name of the bookmaker.......?