Bwin do not follow their own rule? (cost me $60)

**Santo** · 06-20-09, 11:35 AM

The problem is that the way it's written, the 72 hours applies to the 'end without a score' clause. Normal policy with bookmakers is that if a game is played within 72 hours of the scheduled date the bet stands, but I agree their rules are poorly written if that is what they intended to reflect.

**tomwakefield** · 06-20-09, 11:41 AM

It certainly naturally reads the way you interpreted it, but it could be ambiguous, depending on whether the 72 hour rule applies just to suspended games, or suspended and postponed games.

Have you talked to their CS?

**Esco** · 06-20-09, 12:19 PM

They dont have a C- rating for nothing.

I consider them the McDonalds of the betting world.
Great marketing, shitty product

**DearDiarrhee** · 06-20-09, 01:02 PM

like someone said here "the problem is playing at bwin"

**Jaug** · 06-21-09, 05:16 AM

First of all, thanks for the answers.

Originally posted by tomwakefield

It certainly naturally reads the way you interpreted it, but it could be ambiguous, depending on whether the 72 hour rule applies just to suspended games, or suspended and postponed games.

Have you talked to their CS?

Yes I did actually talk to their CS. They answered that if it was played within 72 hours then the bet stands. They changed the rule and sent it like this instead (this is why I took a screenshot):

"
Thank you for your e-mail.

After consulting the responsible bookmaker, we wish to inform you that the result of the bet "Gröndals IK - Syrianska IF Kerburan , 3Way - result, X" on 17.06.2009 disputed over has been correctly evaluated by us and as a result your bet has been confirmed as lost.

The match ended 3:2.

You are welcome to verify our evaluation via the following link:

Everysport.com

http://www.everysport.com/es-site/competition.html?id=32914&division_id=10320

If by chance you know another source that can prove the contrary, we'll be more than happy to examine your inquiry once again.

*******

Please bear in mind the following:

"If a betting event is postponed or cancelled, and restarted within 72 hours, the bet counts for the restarted betting event. If a betting event is not restarted within 72 hours, the respective bets are void."

The match was scheduled for 14.06.2009 16:00:00 GMT+1 and took place on 17.06.2009 at 15:30 GMT+1.
"
But when you write your rule like they did, and it says the bet is cancelled that should stand right? This way they rewrite every rule when they want to take peoples money.

I will probably file a complaint since several of you in this thread read the rule like me.

**kkkkk** · 06-22-09, 08:34 AM

emm, sorry but Ominous and Jaug are the same person, or am i misreading something ?

**Jaug** · 06-22-09, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by kkkkk

emm, sorry but Ominous and Jaug are the same person, or am i misreading something ?

My brother was logged in on my computer for some reason so the first post accidently came from him. The dispute is in it's entire form mine, not ominous.

Must have been a cookie lying there for 1 month or something keeping him logged in on my laptop.

**Wea** · 06-23-09, 03:57 PM

Interested in the outcome of this issue.

Hi everyone.

First of all my guess is that we are talkin about an arbitrage/sure-better here (like myself). I recognise the issue as I had the same problem with this specific match. I was lucky enough to bet very little on it so I have not bothered with it.

However, I had another case on Japanes baseball on the same site. Where they first settled my bet as lost as the game was ended after 6 innings. I had bet on run line which ment that it should be decided according to run line rules (and not as finalised game). I had to write two mails, but after that they actually changed their ruling.

It must be obvious for them that I'm surebetting as I bet on everything that moves. I.e. I do not think that they changed their ruling just because I happen to be 2-3000$ down on their site.

Please feel free to send me a personal messege on this issue!

**Jaug** · 06-24-09, 03:11 PM

Still pondering weather or not to take action here... I got a 2nd reply from their CS telling me basically that they corrected the bet 100 % correct

.

Sent them a reply, because the rule actually states that I have a push here. I hope they have someone who knows english in the company.

**BWINcomFraud** · 07-15-09, 06:32 AM

All this problems of fraud and scam at Bwin, is of personal qualities of people who run it.
Ladbrokes also have license in Gibraltar, but their bosses know that by cheating customers it can create a snowball and finish their business, plus I am sure they don't want to steal in the first place.
What you expect of Bwin, their two scammers execs almost went to jail. Why no Ladbrokes exec. ever went to jail?
So Bwin is run by criminals and that's why it is what it is.
Madoff also was a criminal, he stole 60 billion$ from investors, at the same time there are other funds who don't steal from investors.
It's all personal in the end. Bwin is run like a crime gang, not a company and Gibraltar with very weak oversight and regulation is a help for such people. In UK or Europe, Bwin would shut the door and license would be taken after first stealing of not like from me, 736EUR, after first scam of 10EUR they would be out of business in a normal jurisdiction.

**Esco** · 07-15-09, 07:21 PM

I think BWIN should get an F rating

**BWINcomFraud** · 07-16-09, 02:22 AM

In S&P credit ratings, when company is rated C- like Bwin is rated on SBR, it means "In default, for little prospect to recovery". Then only D comes, "In default".
But Bwin must be rated R "Under regulatory supervision"
It is surely moves in this direction, their house of cards only needs one good blow and that's it.

**AimingHigh** · 07-16-09, 02:49 AM

BWINcomFRAUD, spamming the board isn't helping anyone - neither you nor others with complaints. No matter how legitimate your complaint is (I make no judgment call on that), you're detracting from others' legitimate complaints against a range of sportsbooks, not just BWin.

So, please, just fill out the SBR complaint form, if you haven't already, and let the mods help you.

**BWINcomFraud** · 07-16-09, 03:19 AM

The fact that people look for help against Bwin (I don't know about other complaints with other companies involved so can not say anything) on searching Google, to me is more than enough to be reassured that Bwin is a scam.
Why customers must search for help on Google? If you go to Las Vegas and win 100$ in Black Jack, at least you have a real chip, what you have with Bwin? I explained how they don't charge the cards but only show balance on a website. In general this should be enough, but not with Bwin.
I thought, OK, Bwin say they big, I searched on Google Ladbrokes fraud and William Hill fraud (I don't know other reputable companies that Bwin pretends to be) but nothing was found. Nothing!
You know what it means? I am sure you know. It means that this two companies never cheated a single player and all issues were resolved with them. Ladbrokes customers don't have to search on Google for help, they get all the help they need with the company. That's why their reputation and brand is worth maybe even few billion pounds, because they are crystal clear.
And besides, not to pay a winning customer is much worse than stealing. And using lawyer for telling me that me is not me (even if letter is addressed to me, with my name) and my cards are not mine and I am not allowed to use my cards.
No, Bwin is scam and fraud. This is not only my opinion, this is opinion of many and not only on this website, check forums on other websites about Bwin. Or if there are people here who know Spanish, Italian, Chinese, Japanese, French I would like to know if English is the only language with complaints about Bwin.

**Esco** · 07-17-09, 07:37 AM

Well said!!

I'm also concerned with sports teams accepting BWIN as sponsors.
Major conflict of interest.

And if you dont think match-fixing ever happens, you are living in a fantasy world

**BWINcomFraud** · 07-17-09, 08:14 AM

This is also worth noticing, why Ladbrokes or William Hill (sorry, I really don't know other companies) don't sponsor any big teams.
Maybe I am wrong but I never seen advertising on players T-Shirs with this 2 names.
It have sense, first it doesn't create any conflict of interest with the betting community or against a betting community, second and more important: If some big company in betting is already very reputable and never was suspected of fraud, why they have to invest this money in such a cheap looking advertising as placing their name on a T-Shirt (Adidas or other sponsors do it for completely different reason as they are not accepting bets, they sell products and services), they rather return this money to shareholders.
Bwin is also a public company but they for some reason decide to spend only on Real Madrid 15 million EUR per year.
Why such a rush for so agressive and expensive advertising? Maybe it helps to bring in new customers, as those who know Bwin's reputation or customers cheated in one way or another will never come back in a lifetime.
I hope Real Madrid will kick Bwin a goal and refuse their ill gotten money. But the more serious issue, what will happen to customers who will be stuck inside, in case Bwin will go bust. Who will pay them?

http://www.spanishgamingnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=271&Itemid=25

**Ruifgalmeida** · 07-17-09, 11:04 AM

ruifgalmeida

I never had any problems with bwin, but i dont understand why anybody bets there they have the badest odds in the business