Betfair $3.1 million slow-pay and other pro player issues (Video)

[yokspot]

Some people appear incapable of comprehending the legal relationship between parties to transactions carried out by an agent.

Why do you only EVER defend them? I'm an affiliate of theirs (business relationship of sorts), and I'm capable of seeing fault when it's there. You seem totally blind to anything Betfair does.

Malta LGA isn't good news. Betfair will say they've "paid" and I'm sure the LGA will back them. It's total BS though. The OP has not been paid, and Betfair, if they sent the money to the local drug baron and he is now refusing to send it on, needs to be proactive in requesting it BACK. It looks not a bit suspicious at this point.

How hard is it to say "please return the outstanding funds to us?"

[Hareeba!]

Why do you only EVER defend them? I'm an affiliate of theirs (business relationship of sorts), and I'm capable of seeing fault when it's there. You seem totally blind to anything Betfair does.

Malta LGA isn't good news. Betfair will say they've "paid" and I'm sure the LGA will back them. It's total BS though. The OP has not been paid, and Betfair, if they sent the money to the local drug baron and he is now refusing to send it on, needs to be proactive in requesting it BACK. It looks not a bit suspicious at this point.

How hard is it to say "please return the outstanding funds to us?"

Firstly, I don't only every defend them. I've never defended the premium charge for example and have been critical of them over a number of other issues from time to time.

The title of this thread is accusing Betfair of slow pay. We've heard a lot from Anty (though he's evaded some questions) but nothing from Betfair.

If you have listened to the video and read all of this thread you should have noticed the reference to a "Master Account".

Santo posted some information about Master Accounts but I don't think he or anyone else here (maybe Anty aside) has a full handle on how they operate. And I think the whole issue very likely depends on the terms, conditions and responsibilities attaching to such an account.

My best guess is that Anty had some issues in being able to efficiently fund a normal Betfair account in his name and that he contacted Betfair and they suggested a few alternatives he may wish to consider. One of which was this PSP mob.

So he contacted PSP and they informed him that they had a Master Account with Betfair and that for a nominal fee Anty could have access to a sub-account and that they could promptly arrange funds transfers for him. So Anty thought that sounded good and proceeded with the suggestion.

So Anty now has a sub-account to PSP's Master Account. Do Betfair even know Anty has use of this sub-account? Do they even know who Anty is? Has he undergone their KYC ?

What I am saying is that Betfair may not have ever even heard of Anty although he is using their platform to wager. In this scenario clearly Betfair has no contract with Anty. Their contract is with PSP as the account owner and it is to them that Betfair is responsible.

Alternatively it may be a bit more structured than that scenario. Maybe there exists a form or registration for the use of sub-accounts and that Anty is known to Betfair and has been subjected to the KYC program. However, the principal account holder remains PSP and it is most probable that the contract terms (which surely Betfair would have made known to Anty because their lawyers would have insisted on it) stipulate that PSP directs where withdrawals are paid to.

Either way PSP is Anty's agent for dealing with Betfair. He would have agreed to the terms and conditions under which they conduct business, inclduing dealing with withdrawals. Betfair will have satisfied their responsibility if they paid the withdrawal in accord with PSP's instructions. It is PSP who is responsible to Anty to account for his money.

Now, having said all that, IF PSP is an agent of or an entity controlled by Betfair then that would put the responsibility back on to Betfair.

The above may not be how it all works. But from reading the material available to us all I am doing is presenting what appears to be a fairly likely scenario.

So in summary I am saying it is somewhere between premature at best to downright unfair to condemn Betfair at this stage in the absence of more details about the matter.

[tachi]

It is not a betfair issue once they have paid the money to the payment provider. The title of the video should not be befair slow play. Betfair does have an obligation to push the payment provider to expediate the funds transfer to it's client though.

if the player is not paid and he decides to go in the court,
then who'll be the opponent?

1)Betfair- as the player's account is with Betfair
or
2) the processor

I think it is 1) and if Betfair lose the case,then they will sue their processor
for damages.

[anty]

Do Betfair even know Anty has use of this sub-account? Do they even know who Anty is? Has he undergone their KYC ?

1.Yes. 2.Yes. 3.Yes

[Scooter]

Hareeba! - "What I am saying is that Betfair may not have ever even heard of Anty although he is using their platform to wager. In this scenario clearly Betfair has no contract with Anty. Their contract is with PSP as the account owner and it is to them that Betfair is responsible."

Anty made clear in his 1st post that he was referred to the agent thru a Betfair exec.

And in post #205 he provides some specifics of how the contact was made via Betfair.

So obviously Betfair HAS heard of Anty.

[Hareeba!]

Hareeba! - "What I am saying is that Betfair may not have ever even heard of Anty although he is using their platform to wager. In this scenario clearly Betfair has no contract with Anty. Their contract is with PSP as the account owner and it is to them that Betfair is responsible."

Anty made clear in his 1st post that he was referred to the agent thru a Betfair exec.

And in post #205 he provides some specifics of how the contact was made via Betfair.

So obviously Betfair HAS heard of Anty.

Yes clearly they are now at least aware of him

Nothing in post #205 clarifies the situation beyond what I mentioned.

[Scooter]

Yes clearly they are now at least aware of him

Not "now". They were aware of him before the current situation occurred.

Betfair, thru one of their execs, was aware of him before he made contact with the agent, and , he made contact with the agent thru Betfair's suggestion.

So in the context of this case, Betfair was always aware of him.

[anty]

Either way PSP is Anty's agent for dealing with Betfair. He would have agreed to the terms and conditions under which they conduct business, inclduing dealing with withdrawals. Betfair will have satisfied their responsibility if they paid the withdrawal in accord with PSP's instructions. It is PSP who is responsible to Anty to account for his money.
Now, having said all that, IF PSP is an agent of or an entity controlled by Betfair then that would put the responsibility back on to Betfair.

I dealt with betfair myself in all issues apart from deposits and withdrawals. PSP for sure are responsible but again, putting aside legal issues which are complex and difficult for me to comment on, betfair failed dismally to protect their loyal customer from mobsters. How on earth mr Kacharava, a guy with lets put it mildly questionable reputation, got a contract with betfair in the first place?

[acw]

Hareeba!

The longer this thread gets the more BetFair seems to be in trouble and you are contributing to that big time.
I think most posters have a very good feel of what has been going on. Those (still) bashing BetFair like me do not mind if they go out of business "yesterday". You seem to be one of the very few that is satisfied with them and if true, then best to keep quiet and hope that this thread will die out.

[Hareeba!]

Hareeba!

The longer this thread gets the more BetFair seems to be in trouble and you are contributing to that big time.
I think most posters have a very good feel of what has been going on. Those (still) bashing BetFair like me do not mind if they go out of business "yesterday". You seem to be one of the very few that is satisfied with them and if true, then best to keep quiet and hope that this thread will die out.

It seems the concept of innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply in this forum.
Betfair is the prime book for millions of satisfied customers.
To the best of my knowledge no customer has ever been swindled by them.
The cases reported here all have some extraordinary circumstances surrounding them which regular customers never get involved with and they have no need to be concerned about at all.
Unfortunately Betfair isn't able to come on and defend themselves against unfair attacks.

[anty]

To the best of my knowledge no customer has ever been swindled by them.

lol. How do you justfy for ex their practice of uniting accounts for Premium Charge avoidance? In most cases they may be right in their suspicions but still when they do it without clear evidence like common IPs or computers it looks very bad. Innocent until proven guilty, in your words...
Btw, I can repeat, I never had this problem, always had 1 account at the time and paid Premium Charges.

[Hareeba!]

lol. How do you justfy for ex their practice of uniting accounts for Premium Charge avoidance? In most cases they may be right in their suspicions but still when they do it without clear evidence like common IPs or computers it looks very bad. Innocent until proven guilty, its your words...
Btw, I can repeat, I never had this problem, always had 1 account at the time and paid Premium Charges.

If two or more account holders collude to gain an advantage not intended by a book's rules then they are entitled to do that. If you check their rules I'm sure you'd find that they say as much. There have been reports of this happening at many books, particularly in connection with bonus abuse. It's not just Betfair.

[anty]

If two or more account holders collude to gain an advantage not intended by a book's rules then they are entitled to do that.

Yes, but they should prove it. "Similar betting strategy" is not a proof it is bullsh*t.

[Ace_of_Spades]

If it gets ugly, Betdaq will gladly become the number 1 exchange. Betfair better be careful with what they are doing. Betdaq is getting better day by day.

[Hareeba!]

Yes, but they should prove it. "Similar betting strategy" is not a proof it is bullsh*t.

They're not as stupid as many players may think. They have very sophisticated means of detecting collusion and other breaches of their rules.

They'd have pretty conclusive evidence if they are taking action on it.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

well, for him its not Gibraltar but will be Malta LGA, as hes from Russia. So not that much promising. But he can try.

Oh, yuck.

Not even worth bothering then, you know what the answer will be.

[Wally Balls]

Anty please pm me soccer picks each day, thanks

[acw]

Unfortunately Betfair isn't able to come on and defend themselves against unfair attacks.

Oh no?
I think they are more than welcome to post here!

[Scooter]

Hareeba! - "It seems the concept of innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply in this forum."

Such as this?

Hareeba! - "I wouldn't be too surprised if Betfair isn't falling over itself to see this guy paid speedily as they probably know he's made the money playing fixed games."

[Scooter]

Oh no?
I think they are more than welcome to post here!

Betfair posts regularly at some of the forums - I believe at the RX, or at least they used to.



Hareeba! - "Unfortunately Betfair isn't able to come on and defend themselves against unfair attacks."

On what do you base this statement?

[excel]

hareeba seems like a shill

[excel]

[Hareeba!]

Hareeba! - "Unfortunately Betfair isn't able to come on and defend themselves against unfair attacks."

On what do you base this statement?

Strict privacy laws prohibit them discussing individual cases.

[Scorpion]

A listed company like Betfair should not be able to fool around like this. They should only work with high quality payment processors and they should have foreseen this happening. If they were any good they would known about the limitations because they have a constructive dialogue between themselves and the payment processor. And as such they should have informed the player that he should perhaps use a different method - or a combination of methods - if he wants to get his money out quicker. They are not easystreetsports or some shady CR operation that has people running around with cash.

They chose to work with the payment processor and they should do whatever they can to make it right.

I agree.

Do you really think fukking betfair would send a processor in Russia over 3 million?

[Scorpion]

hareeba seems like a shill

I agree, he really should shut the fukk up

[Hareeba!]

I agree, he really should shut the fukk up

I don't suppose you have any rational arguments you'd could put up against what I've posted?

[tim0402]

dont they own TVG?

[Scorpion]

Betfair, why did you take my money? (Video)

[Scorpion]

Betfair robs hundreds of casino players on November 13th "Happy Hour" promotion

[Hareeba!]

Betfair robs hundreds of casino players on November 13th "Happy Hour" promotion

Yes, that was another unfair post
The players were contravening Betfair's standard terms and conditions

There was a recent promo put out in Australia by Betfair which failed to prominently display a couple of exclusions and it caught out lots of players who failed to read the rules before taking part

In a goodwill gesture Betfair nevertheless paid out to all those players.
Where was Justin's report on that one ?

Now please tell me where what I've said in this thread which you don't agree with.

[Scooter]

Hareeba! - "Yes, that was another unfair post
The players were contravening Betfair's standard terms and conditions".

You're referring to the November 13th "Happy Hour" promotion?

I just watched Justin's video. I heard nothing of players contravening Betfair's standard terms and conditions.
I did hear and see that Betfair changed the terms of the promotion after the promotion had begun, and without notifying players of this unless they won.

It seems a clear cut case of theft.

Or perhaps you are referring to another of the clear cut cases of theft which Justin cites in the same video?

[Hareeba!]

Hareeba! - "Yes, that was another unfair post
The players were contravening Betfair's standard terms and conditions".

You're referring to the November 13th "Happy Hour" promotion?

I just watched Justin's video. I heard nothing of players contravening Betfair's standard terms and conditions.
I did hear and see that Betfair changed the terms of the promotion after the promotion had begun, and without notifying players of this unless they won.

It seems a clear cut case of theft.

Or perhaps you are referring to another of the clear cut cases of theft which Justin cites in the same video?

Yes it "seems" that way doesn't it?
A shame ALL the facts weren't brought to light.

But this thread is about the $3.1m case.
Some have had a shot at me personally but not put forward any sensible arguments about what I've posted in regard to it.

[Scooter]

Hareeba! - "Yes it "seems" that way doesn't it?
A shame ALL the facts weren't brought to light."

I just watched the "Betfair why did you take my money?" video.

It states that Betfair is seizing money with no explanation.

If ALL the facts were not brought to light, it seems to be Betfair's fault, as they are not willing to state to the players whose money they are seizing WHY they are doing so.
That is a shame - or shameful.

You seem to be inferring that you are aware of facts in these cases that Justin7 is not.

[Hareeba!]

Hareeba! - "Yes it "seems" that way doesn't it?
A shame ALL the facts weren't brought to light."

I just watched the "Betfair why did you take my money?" video.

It states that Betfair is seizing money with no explanation.

If ALL the facts were not brought to light, it seems to be Betfair's fault, as they are not willing to state to the players whose money they are seizing WHY they are doing so.
That is a shame - or shameful.

You seem to be inferring that you are aware of facts in these cases that Justin7 is not.

I don't know how far Justin went into Betfair's defence of their action but from my information the players had failed to read or comprehend all the conditions and were deliberately taking advantage of the promo contrary to those conditions.

Some talked of taking Betfair to court over it. Justin hasn't reported on the outcome of any such proposed action to the best of my knowledge.

[eberetta1]

Premium charges of 60 percent on account that have won over $250,000 is ridiculous. It is bad enough to hurdle the juice charge, then this tacked on. Betfair is trying to make the whole sportsbook world look bad. Imagine if players no longer want to deposit at any book because of Betfair's behavior.