Matchbook Complaint-Self Exclusion Theft

**DiggityDaggityDo** · 05-11-15, 01:43 PM

Unreal

**SBR Forum** · 05-11-15, 01:51 PM

Hi Gary, we are happy to point you in the right direction on places nearby your location to seek support. As for being able to access your Matchbook account, the bets had action; if you had won, you'd have gotten paid.

**GarySheridan** · 05-11-15, 01:57 PM

I don't believe you are right in this instance. In the event of a win the precedent is to freeze an account and provide the deposit back.

In any event the system control is the issue. It's their error in this instance. I can site many examples if this is an area you're not familiar with.

I lost €5000 on their casino so this was a typical bookmaker scenario rather than an exchange

Best regards,

Gary

**jjgold** · 05-11-15, 10:54 PM

Gary where are you from??

I can get you into a program and have sponsored guys here

Let me know

**Tuzla** · 05-11-15, 11:20 PM

Christ, take responsibility for your own actions rather than trying top blame someone else

**rangerz2478** · 05-12-15, 02:24 AM

Aren't you the same guy who posted this about another book? This isn't the first time I've seen this exact story on here...

**tomallen123** · 05-12-15, 07:09 AM

Sorry but the fault is yours and not matchbooks.

**pjesnik24** · 05-12-15, 08:10 AM

was not there few years ago a case with a reputable bookie cancelling all winning bets because somebody asked them to freeze their account? I believe SBR concluded that it was OK to void bets

**tomallen123** · 05-12-15, 09:33 AM

From Matchbook terms

During this period, we will also take all reasonable measures to prevent you from using the Matchbook services. When requesting self-exclusion you are also agreeing to refrain from attempting to circumvent the procedures we have in place to prevent you from placing a bet during the exclusion period.

**virtozo** · 05-12-15, 10:17 AM

seems there were no procedures in place lol. I also remember a similar case with bets voided in the past, I think it was paddypower.

**BigOrange** · 05-12-15, 10:54 AM

So you are looking to Free roll them?

If you win, all is great, and if you lose, cry and try to get your money back.

**konck** · 05-12-15, 11:31 AM

Both sides are stains This idiot for crying about losing when that's all he has done his whole life.
The site for taking the bets from broke dik fuk who asked out

**JayZ** · 05-12-15, 06:01 PM

You should read up on the case that would be cited as precedent - Calvert v William Hill Credit Ltd. Here William Hill's systems for exclusion failed but the judge ruled no damages were due as Calvert as a complusive gambler would have done the same actions by opening an acount at a different bookmaker if denied by Hills.

Now it is slightly different as Calvert was betting and you were gaming, but would the principle be seen as any different?

**dontknowhowtobet** · 05-13-15, 01:54 AM

Gary,

I'm sorry to say this but you are posting your inquiry in the wrong forum - this forum will bash people for stories like yours - the type of people here are mostly from the US, they are not familiar with the European regulations, and they are definitely not familiar with "Self Exclusions" which is a fairly new concept in the US Gambling market.

Some quoted the story of Graham Calvert who was self-excluded and lost in trial - I remember his story very well, he actually opened another account with William Hill and then the judge said he would have gambled anyway ... You however, according to your version could use the very same account you had with MatchBook! This is a clear violation of the bookmaker and not yours - a similar incident has resulted in a player receiving £1,500 GBP back from Bet-At-Home:

http://www.bookmakersforum.com/bookmakers/self-excluded-could-still-open-account-bet-homecom/337

Anyway don't expect many people here to respond like I did, most of them have no sense of understanding what you're complaining about - my suggestion to you is to either contact the Gambling Authority in Alderney or use forums like CasinoMeister instead where they might better understand you.

And my apologies for "bashing" the forum but what you're doing to this guy is simply unfair - either treat his complaint professionally or just don't post at all, silence is golden!

**JayZ** · 05-14-15, 11:49 AM

The distinction has to be drawn between cases in courts of law, and actions of regulators. The latter is as said above more likely to achieve the result you want. As you indicate you were betting in euro so you are probably not in the UK so it is Alderney to approach.

**dealer wins** · 05-15-15, 04:49 AM

If your duplicate account was opened with EXACTLY the same personal information (Name spelling, DOB address and Tel) then you have half a case. If any details are different then IMO you are 100% at fault.

My personal feeling is that it was you that opened the account and gambled, so you should be liable for any losses. But this is 2015, where personal responsibility doesn't really exist any more and its always someone else's fault.

**Hareeba!** · 05-15-15, 04:52 AM

Originally posted by dealer wins

If your duplicate account was opened with EXACTLY the same personal information (Name spelling, DOB address and Tel) then you have half a case. If any details are different then IMO you are 100% at fault.

My personal feeling is that it was you that opened the account and gambled, so you should be liable for any losses. But this is 2015, where personal responsibility doesn't really exist any more and its always someone else's fault.

Duplicate account?
From my reading of his post he simply accessed his existing account.

**dealer wins** · 05-15-15, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by Hareeba!

Duplicate account?
From my reading of his post he simply accessed his existing account.

Opps Sorry my mistake. In that case if MB have not blocked his account as agreed then they should refund him absolutely.