Do I have a reasonable cause for complaint here?

TLD · 04-02-07, 04:35 PM

I’d lean toward saying you do have a cause for complaint.

Certainly I think you did the right thing. You noticed the ambiguity, you contacted the book seeking clarification before the match started, and your e-mail very clearly stated your position. There’s nothing in your wagering or your e-mail that comes across to me as “taking a shot” or the like. (The only thing I might suggest for next time is that in a situation where time is of the essence—that is, where you’re trying to get them to commit to whatever interpretation they choose prior to the match so that you know where you stand—you might want to phone them or try a live chat or something where you have a better chance of getting an immediate response.)

Taken in isolation, I would say it is reasonable for the book to cancel wagers like this once they become aware of the ambiguity. However, the experiences you cite of the other bettors are relevant here. Apparently there are precedents for their interpreting this style of bet—and indeed this specific bet—as being on the match and not the whole tournament. Given that, there would have to be some special justification for canceling your wager since they did not cancel all of them.

And the only apparent difference is that you took the time to alert them to the ambiguity and to ask that your wager be cancelled if and only if they intended it to be for the whole tournament. I don’t see that as sufficient grounds to “punish” you by canceling what apparently would have been a winning wager had you not spoken up.

It’s not an easy situation, because we know and they know that had Fleming not been the top goal scorer, no bettor would seek to reopen this matter and argue that the bet should be reinstated. But I would say that because they erred in posting the lines ambiguously to begin with, and because they further missed the opportunity you gave them to communicate with you on this matter and settle how it should be handled before the outcome of the bet was determined, it makes sense that they be the party slightly disadvantaged by our now knowing the outcome.

Bill Dozer · 04-02-07, 04:51 PM

Did you write back and tell them you wanted the bet to stand if the bet was as you thought?

If it's the reduced big book I think you are talking about mgt. would likely look into the matter. Feel free to contact us with your acct. info.

rufcut · 04-02-07, 05:46 PM

Thank you very much for the replies.

TLD, I did try to phone the bookie within half an hour of placing the bet, but got a 'not available' answerphone message (they are on the other side of the globe so it was their evening.) They do not have live chat as far as I can see.

As regards the timing, messages are timed and dated in their zone.
I sent mine (quoted above) 02-04-2007 20:30,
the match started 02-04-2007 23:00,
they replied cancelling 03-04-2007 02:07.
I had expected that since the bet had not been cancelled before the start of the match, it would stand, so did not bother checking after that - went and did some gardening...with an ear to the radio of course!

When I later discovered that the bet had been cancelled, I was a bit disappointed but I thought it was nice of them to have cancelled it as it must have been on the tournament.

However, I had mentioned the ambiguity of the bet on a betting forum this morning, and by luck, a person who had bet on the same market told me that this was definitely a match bet and he subsequently confirmed his bet on this market has been settled as a winner.

~

Bill, I did not write to tell CS that I wanted the bet to stand if the bet was as I thought, as I thought that was clear in what I had written initially.
The bet was not cancelled until the match had started, and I only discovered the cancellation later on as detailed above.

My impression of this book so far is that it is generally decent and I hope they will take into account the points in my favour.
I will see how I get on with it and thank you for your invitation to contact you if necessary.
Your availablity as well as willingness to help is much appreciated.

rufcut · 04-03-07, 03:43 AM

Well I'm chuffed to bits.

A message sent last night, after having run the situation past you, led to the book reinstating the bet within a few hours, with good grace too. I did not mention SBR to them, just put my case.

I am happy to name the book now that this has turned into a positive story. It is Betworks. They are obviously having a few teething problems, and CS access is limited, but they are honourable and the CS manager goes out of his way to be helpful.

After this I have to wish them all the best and recommend them - they have a $500 AUD sign up bonus as well!

JoshW · 04-03-07, 01:58 PM

Glad to hear it worked out. Must be a pretty good book to resolved it in that manner.

rufcut · 04-05-07, 06:07 PM

Thank you.
I should have said a $250 AUD bonus ~ got a bit carried away!

Bill Dozer · 04-05-07, 07:19 PM

Thanks Rufcut. Keep us posted on experience there.

rufcut · 04-23-07, 05:53 AM

There are some good value odds here and they are now easier to find because they are on Betbrain's comparison site.

Settlement of bets is swift.

One problem I did note though is that for live betting, your bet can be considered for several minutes (I think up to ten) before it 'times out' which is fair enough IF the player also has the option to cancel the request during that time, but at the moment the player does not have that option here, so better to avoid live betting I think, in case something major happens in a match while Betworks is considering whether to take your stake.

rufcut · 05-05-07, 05:39 PM

I am having a problem withdrawing from Betworks.
I provided all the ID 3 days ago, received no acknowledgement of it, and when I go to withdraw, there is the message: "Sorry, you cannot perform withdrawal transactions because your ID has not been provided."
I am starting to be a little concerned as I have a few hundred GBP in here. Advice welcome.

rufcut · 05-21-07, 10:33 AM

They paid out good as gold, and advised they just have a lot of admin. backlog.
I would trust them with my money again.

Ganchrow · 05-21-07, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by rufcut

They paid out good as gold, and advised they just have a lot of admin. backlog.
I would trust them with my money again.

Glad to hear that this has been favorably resolved.