BetEd player makes $6,931 mistake

[dolce05]

this is a tough situation for both. Rules are posted for a reason. If you want to carelessly jump into something not knowing "really" what your getting into....who's to blame??

How many have gotten paid on a bet that they really lost??? We all have (well at least i have), but the point is you wont complain you got paid, but if they didnt credit you with a win you would call right away. So why should they be any different. You deposit money and dont follow the rules they'll take your money all day, but when you try and collect they'll point out your error. I dont like it but the rule was stated for everyone to read and its not in fine print.

I dont want to see this guy lose his money (and i'm sure my post dont mean squat) but rules are rules. I'm sure alot of people have cashed out big on beted as well. I personally dont like any books and wish for everyone to win....but you have to call it like you see it.

My opinion because of all the bad press beted should come up with a fair settlement.....but if this guy gets any payment you can kiss that rule goodbye and all the scammers will be out to try their luck.

Whether you all want to believe it or not alot of these rules are for your safety too.

I hope he collects something and they can settle on something at least ....but right now it doesnt look good.

Like B. Dozer states some dates will be crucial.


Maybe they can let him keep the money in the account and give him a chance to roll it over 2-3 times. If he can its his....if not...welcome to the wonderful world of "degenerates R us". Put another fifty in and try your luck.....try using your own account this time.

[bettilimbroke999]

BetEd should pay the kid his money BUT the kid is also in the wrong here, who the fuk signs up with someone else's bank account, if you're not listed on the bank account you can't authorize debits on the bank account so what was this kid thinking, does he not even have his own bank account? For such a small deposit its a miracle this kid got to 7k but if he had lost would he have just not told his dad and hoped he either didnt see the transaction or would report it to his bank to get it canceled? Is this kid under 18 I mean why not just sign the father up if you are going to be using his checking account to deposit and withdrawal, very strange situation

[purecarnagge]

BetEd should pay the kid his money BUT the kid is also in the wrong here, who the fuk signs up with someone else's bank account, if you're not listed on the bank account you can't authorize debits on the bank account so what was this kid thinking, does he not even have his own bank account? For such a small deposit its a miracle this kid got to 7k but if he had lost would he have just no told his dad and hoped he either didnt see the transaction or would report it to his bank to get it canceled? Is this kid under 18 I mean why not just sign the father up if you are going to be using his checking account to deposit and withdrawal, very strange situation

Maybe his dad said it was okay...

here is what they can't stand behind. Its illegal to debit from someones account. Its fraud and blah blah blah. Well gambling on sports in the US is illegal to do. So the whole holyier than grail doesn't count. The book took the bet they booked it. They had action on it. They need to pay its that simple.

[wild willy]

Thanks guys, Just want to say on such a busy day thanks for taking a minute and reading and posting I was ****ing goiing to looes it last night. when I read this. Like I said Beted saved themself $7000 ButI figured there's lots of guys who are big spenders .I'm not one. If they lose 50,000 from posters on this form and not saying any names but if someone tomorrow posts this thread on every gambling post in the world. did they really save any $.

[pavyracer]

Once the book takes action the bet is valid. Period! It doesn't matter anymore if the book didn't do their due diligence before signing up the player and not verifying the transaction. Let me put it in this way. If the kid stole the $50 bucks from his father's wallet and walked in Vegas at a book and placed a bet that won and someone told the book can they cancel the wager 10 days after the bet was placed? No!

Pay up or shut up BetEd!

[pimike]

Once the book takes action the bet is valid. Period! It doesn't matter anymore if the book didn't do there due diligence before signing up the player and not verifying the transaction. Let me put it in this way. If the kid stole the $50 bucks from his father wallet and walk in Vegas at a book and placed a bet that won and someone told the book can they cancel the wager 10 days after the bet was placed? No!

Pay up or shut up BetEd!

[wild willy]

Gamblers place the money without us there is no book

[HedgeHog]

In general I think the account should be paid---but to the father who unknowingly put up the money. For all we know, the son may be a minor, which opens up another can of worms.

[ringemup]

I stopped using these clowns from BETed years ago and this case kind of justifies that reason. i knew they would do sumthing classless like this, its not a surprise to me, they have no respect for anyone who gives them money. i agree, if they had taken action early n shut his account down before he started making wagers that had action, then these clowns could have avoided this embarrassment. yea, well im glad this classless book is gonna take a big hit on their reputation.

[reno cool]

After all these years the policy of requiring documents after a bet is placed is still common practice. That needs to stop. I always ask a book If they require this mombo jumbo. I will not sign up if they do. Usually the good books only require this for cc which I don't use.

If it was really a security issue they would demand everything upfront. Stall tactics and technicalities are common in this business and this is just that.

[Dark Horse]

If it was really a security issue they would demand everything upfront. Stall tactics and technicalities are common in this business and this is just that.

Very well put. It's as simple as that.

[Dark Horse]

Two people have come to this board (one in person), with similar cases in which Beted hid behind a paper excuse that saved the book a total of 25K. Where there is smoke there is fire, my friends.

And SBR hasn't even downgraded this crap book. What is going on with SBR?!

The watchdog that meowed?

[bettilimbroke999]

The first time I actually agreed with BetED stiffin the fuk out of that scumbag he/she Minn soccer mom/CR sportsbook owner, but this is far different and they should pay the kid. I really feel like eChecks are a terrible idea for a book, its essentially giving players a credit line, all you have to do is not have the money in your bank account and the book aint gettin a dime, if on the other hand you nuke the book and quadruple your deposit you drop off a deposit the next morning at the bank and then cash out your profits.

With a very risky deposit method like this players need to be sure not to do anything sketchy such as use someone else's bank account, but in this case since the total risk to the book was a mere 50 dollars I find it hard to believe this kid is a scammer trying to take a shot at BetEd, pay the kid his money and change your eCheck procedures to require documentation BEFORE accepting the players bets BetEd

[chance]

I will not use beted again.

I think it is stupid to expect people to read every rule at all the different places.

Quality sportsbooks make decisions not based on silly rules but on the validity of each case. In this case it looks like a "kid" made a naive move.

[andywend]

I'm assuming this guy didn't run his $50 into $7,000 from one day of betting.

As long as the echeck cleared, if BetED does NOT pay, that makes them no different than all the "deposit only" sportsbooks out there and their rating needs to be downgraded to F-.

If its truly not about the money and BetEd wants to stick to their guns, then they should make a $7,000 donation to a charity in the bettors name.

However, we all know that BetED is doing this because they don't want to pay out the $7,000.

[wtf]

thats right andy

they are fukin evil greedy lying pigs

we should start moving this thread around

[wild willy]

Anyword on if this kid is possibly going to see any money

[pavyracer]

The silence from SBR is mind-boggling. It appears as SBR is receiving kickbacks from BetEd to let them continue commiting crimes against players. Not a single SBR employee took the obvious stand to defend the player that did nothing wrong.

This speaks very lowely of SBR.

[wtf]

wow pavy, i hope your wrong

but you could be right

i still believe all you have to do is pay for a nice rating from sbr, eventhough they claim "it is earned"

[Dark Horse]

In my memory SBR used to downgrade (and upgrade) books more frequently. When I first came here I really felt that SBR would stand up for the player. I don't have that impression anymore. It does seem that a business model has taken over, and that it's more important these days not to rub books the wrong way. I can only hope I'm wrong.

[Dark Horse]

And even if there were a change in direction, that wouldn't be a problem if it was explained. Question to SBR.

Are you still a watchdog organization, yes or no?

[pavyracer]

Dark Horse,

If you believe the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is the watchdog to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons then SBR is the watchdog to help the player's interests. Once you sell your soul to the devil there is no turning back.

[Dark Horse]

Unless my memory is clouding my judgment, I could swear that SBR would stick their neck out on behalf of the player. Isn't that how Bill Dozer started? I would love to read the history of SBR.

Generally speaking, a watchdog has to be fearless. And it would be normal for an organization that has experienced considerable growth to become slightly fearful of losing what it has build up; the start of conservatism. It is also normal for individuals as well as organizations to grow in the direction of least resistance. To maintain focus and avoid getting away from their roots corporations often have mission statements. I find myself somewhat curious as to what SBR's mission statement is these days. Call me confused.

And if there's not going to be an answer in this thread regarding such concerns, that would be an answer in itself. Hush hush has no place in a house of integrity.

[themajormt]

I am shocked that we have not heard an answer from SBR at all on this... This is a blatant theft of money that was rightfully earned, was not shot taking, and SBR is still not responding???

[pavyracer]

I am shocked that we have not heard an answer from SBR at all on this... This is a blatant theft of money that was rightfully earned, was not shot taking, and SBR is still not responding???

A black van with the BetEd logo on dropped this in the SBR lobby and they are all busy counting the contents of the sack.

[The General]

From sports room

Quote:
Originally Posted by wild willy
General what do you say about the beted case? You calling in the army


I believe Justin is handling that. If I were heading the book, I would pay the money and start verifying all incoming funds before getting to the point it did. Learn from it and become a better sports book. JMO.

[themajormt]

I believe Justin is handling that. If I were heading the book, I would pay the money and start verifying all incoming funds before getting to the point it did. Learn from it and become a better sports book. JMO.[/quote]


I agree with you General... I dont know if everyone else feels this way but I think the books need to be PROACTIVE with this crap and not REACTIVE. They are running a supposed "business" and this is the stuff that they allow to happen? I am really sick of books crying the blues boo hoo. It is really getting ridiculous... Beted has a history of finding reasons to NOT pay players, and this is a perfect example.

This should be EXACTLY what SBR has an interest in and from what I have read on here so far it sounds like they are dragging their feet and leaning towards the book. WE ARE THE CUSTOMER!!!!!!

[Dark Horse]

A black van with the BetEd logo on dropped this in the SBR lobby and they are all busy counting the contents of the sack.

I don't believe that. My impression is that Justin is acting in a very reasonable and objective manner, and on a case by case basis. However, in doing so he may, possibly, not be representing SBR, as it was originally intended.

When books aren't clearly shown the possibility of a downgrade during negotiations, why would they change? Why would they improve? In the long run this approach only creates more problems. It is up to books to decide if they want to improve their ways or not, and if not, they are going to hurt more players. And it is up to SBR to present books with that choice. As such, a downgrade is not to punish, but to prevent players from placing too much trust in a book. A book has to earn that trust. A book has to be worthy of it. That is why a case-by-case approach without a bigger picture is not enough.

[curious]

I think that SBR should have a policy that no book can receive above a F- rating unless they have a policy of "if we accept the wager, you have a bet".

Kind of like the way it is at the craps table at a casino. When you throw your money down one of the pit crew will call out "bet", or "you have a bet", etc.

That would force books to do whatever checking they want to do when the money is deposited. And it would stop them from using excuses to not pay winners.

[purecarnagge]

I think that SBR should have a policy that no book can receive above a F- rating unless they have a policy of "if we accept the wager, you have a bet".

Kind of like the way it is at the craps table at a casino. When you throw your money down one of the pit crew will call out "bet", or "you have a bet", etc.

That would force books to do whatever checking they want to do when the money is deposited. And it would stop them from using excuses to not pay winners.

Thats a good possibility. only problem is with exception to a bad line. Etc...things like that of course.

[innovator]

the messed up part is beted looks so legit aesthetically and could be a great book and $7000 is only a drop in the bucket for them.

[wild willy]

I wonder If they now how much bad publicity they are getting on this forum. I dont think there are to many members that haven't read this.

[wild willy]

A better question is do you think they care. There is a wide audience on this forum and very little chance of anybody depositing till this kid gets his money.

[DiggityDaggityDo]

**** BetED.

I will never use them after reading this.

[Justin7]

I don't believe that. My impression is that Justin is acting in a very reasonable and objective manner, and on a case by case basis. However, in doing so he may, possibly, not be representing SBR, as it was originally intended.

When I started interacting with SBR, I had a goal: come up with a uniform way to adjudicate player-sportsbook disputes. I have never "represented" SBR. In every dispute, my first goal is to find the right answer. Once I have the answer, I try to get the book to accept the logic. If my logic makes me believe the player is not entitled to money, I follow my logic and not my heart. SBR and I agree in over 99% of the cases, but not all.

This case is perhaps the biggest clash I have ever had between logic and heart. I feel for the player - he is just a gambler that got on a streak (not to be confused with all the other people who claim the same thing, but in actuality just took a free roll with a few bets at long odds). I have gone to bat for many players, and helped them recover roughly $1 million from books that they would not have without SBR's involvement. But before I start squeezing a book to do the right thing, my logic must show that the book is in the wrong.

The facts I concluded were:
In this dispute, the player deposited with a checking account that was not in his name. The rules don't allow that. If Beted takes these deposits, they will loss their processor. Beted always refunds an echeck deposit if it is in the wrong name (and voids winnings). SBR contacted other sportsbooks, and verified that this procedure is common among books, and that a book could lose a processor for taking these kind of deposits.

You can argue over the facts. Feel free to do your own investigation. However, with these facts, I cannot say that Beted fouled. I tried to get the player something for "goodwill", and BetEd declined. BetED (and all sportsbooks) need a way to avoid this issue in the future. But regarding this ONE dispute, my logic says BetED played fair, no matter how crushing it is to my heart. When logic and emotion clash, I will follow logic in every dispute.