Bookmaker Ladbrokes is refusing to pay out more than 7 million pounds to a man who gambled on a white Christmas across the UK, as the bet was accepted by mistake. Cliff Bryant, 52, had placed two 5-pound accumulator bets that snow would fall on 24 towns and cities across the north of England on Christmas Day.
“We have apologised to the customer for any confusion and for mistakenly accepting an accumulator bet when our own rules state that only single bets are available on a market of this nature,” said a Ladbrokes spokesman. “We are happy to void the bets and to pay the customer his winnings on the relevant singles.” They however amount to just 31.78 pounds, rather than the 7.1 million Bryant was expecting.
The graphic designer from Southampton, who told the local Southern Daily Echo newspaper he was “gutted” and would seek legal advice, claims the first accumulator would have won him 4.9 million pounds, with the second adding 2.2 million. “If I make a mistake in my work like that it costs me dearly and I think the offer should be a lot more generous than they have made,” he told the paper.
Read more at Yahoo News
“We are happy to void the bets…”
Well duh.
Don’t bet anyway but a cheap stunt like that would stop me from ever thinking about it.
Hope he sues them for every penny they’ve got.
As far as Im aware from my gambling days
In the UK a bet is not legally binding, it is called a gentlemans agreement so if the bookie decides not to pay out for any reason there is no law forcing them too.
In disputes between a bookie & client it is usually refereed by the sporting life newspaper I have heard, I have also heard they allways find in favour of the bookie….
Well bookies are never trustworthy, this shows again.
I mean a mistake is always punished sorry Ladbrokes dish out the cash and fire the twat who took that bet.
When I was speeding on a piece of road where 60MPH was allowed but later reduced to 50MPH I suffered inattentional blindness but still got the fine error or not it was a breach of an agreement.
Those poor bookmakers need the money though. And considering the joy and togetherness they bring to people throughout the world, the proverbial glue they to provide to so many families and friends, i think it would just be petty new-decade begrudgery to try to take their money off them. I mean, we all make mistakes. A couple of years ago, I remortgaged my house and bet on France winning the Rugby World cup, and then when South Africa won, i realised that i had actually meant to bet on them instead, so I went in to Ladbrokes and explained my silly typo to them, and they were very understanding, and believed me when i said that I hadn’t meant to bet the roof over my kids’ heads on France, – I mean, who would do such a thing? – and they paid out the 80 grand i would have won if hadn’t written down the stupid wrong country on my bet-slip.
Cliff must have known he was trying to scam the bookmaker and that he wasn’t really betting on 24 independent events.
@Colm Haha!
Most bookies will have the old small print which protects them against this kind of ‘error’, normally printed on the poster as you walk into the bookies. So even if it went to court the bookies would probably win and the poor fella will end up with just his £10 wager back, but Ladbrokes could have made an effort to say sorry for the cock up and given him a considerable amount more than the £31 especially since they have been saved from paying out over £7m.
To be fair to Ladbrokes, all bookies have a rule against accumulators being placed on events that effect each other. If it snows in London, it’s quite likely to be snowing in Birmingham too, so I don’t think most punters would expect to be able to place an accumulator bet. Good luck to the guy, but I think he probably knew this even as he placed the bet.
Colm – Bang on! I don’t know about the legal standing of the case, but I can’t see Ladbrokes coughing up for a gambler who “made a mistake” on the betting slip (unless it was something along the lines of what Derren did at the dogtrack).
Perhaps Cliff Bryant should’ve banged his palm against the windowframe of the bookmaker’s boothe and stated in a calm steady voice “This IS the white Christmas I bet on!”
If you did an accumulator for horses and “made a “mistake” and one of the horses lost and you went in and said that you meant to put it on the winner they would say tough luck! I for one only venture into the bookies every once in a while and wouldn’t read all the signs. I work on the basis that if they accept my bet then it must be ok. Also everything is computerised these days, surely if this kind of bet was not allowed it would have been flagged up pretty soon after being placed.
It only takes a gallon of petrol to burn down a building!
@Chanc3r – I thought the Sporting Life newspaper ceased trading years ago? Unless there’s another SL I know nothing of.
I guess the sad thing here is, If Ladbrokes have admitted their error and atoned (in their eyes) for their mistake, then there may not be much Cliff Bryant can do about it. Although if he does think he has a case, then he should by all means take them to court. If his bet was accepted in good faith, I can honestly say I do feel for him. How awful to think you’ve won millions, only to be told you haven’t through no fault of your own.
LC x
Lady Claire you are probably right, I was only commenting on how it was when I used to gamble (a fair few years ago now!)
For hundreds of years bets were unenforceable in law. In the event that the losing party failed to pay the winner could not enforce that debt through the courts as a matter of public policy. This changed with the Gambling Act 2005 introduced in 2007 so gambling debts are now enforceable like any other contract although gaming contracts may still be void like any other contract where for example there is mistake, lack of intention to enter legal relations or illegality.
Whether Mr Bryant has a claim will depend upon the terms of the contract and the circumstances of the alleged mistake. The devil is in the detail. I can certainly understand Mr Bryant’s frustration and disappointment.
Did this bloke seriously think that Ladbrokes were going to pay out £7M for a tenner on that bet!! For a start every time you place a bet you are agreeing to abide by their rules. A weather bet is catogorised by them as a ‘special bet’ and the Ladbroke limit for special bets is just £10,000. Secondly if it snows in say Leeds, it obviously means the chances of snow in Harrogate are massively increased. Likewise Manchester and Liverpool etc. The whole episode is laughable, if I were him I would just forget the matter, as Ladbrokes are covered in so many ways by their rules. This type of error is covered by their related bets rule. An example is to back Frank Lampard to score the first goal in a Chelsea game doubled with Chelsea to win, the first part of the bet makes the second much more likely.
So a bookmaker whose business is to make a living out of betting, and who has set the odds in order to make a living, and has rigged the whole enterprise to enable that living to be made, including the drafting of terms and conditions that ensure that such living can still be made in the event of mistakes by employees — has been given the choice of paying out over seven million quid, or on the other hand paying less than forty. And the choice is… less than forty. Now there’s a surprise.
There’s one sure way to avoid losing money to a bookmaker. Don’t bet. (But you knew that.)
the bookmaker has paid out under £40 for one simple reason, that is the correct amount. If the correct amount is more then they pay more- up to the published limits. If they were in the habit of not paying out then they would not get their licence renewed. This bloke has placed a bet that is so obviously incorrect he must have been having a laugh or downright stupid. When Frankie Detorri won 7 races in one day the bookies paid out tens of millions as those bets were valid and not related
As has been said, one cannot place an accumulator on dependent events. However, Ladbrokes have acted in bad faith by accepting Mr Bryant’s bet, although they must have known they wouldn’t have to pay out. Ladbrokes couldn’t really lose, and I’m sure if any single leg of the accumulator had failed, they would have kept quiet and not paid out the other legs as singles. I see it as sharp practice but the law is always on the bookies’ side. I’ve been highly successful at football results betting (using statistical models) and there are now few bookmakers willing to take bets from me. There’s nothing I can do about this – it’s entirely legal discrimination. My mum can make a bet with Paddy Power (to name one of many), but if I try to place the very same bet online, they won’t let me. Bookmakers can do as they please.
if you put a football double on. Rooney 1sy goal Man Utd win 1-0. if he scores in the 90th minute. making it one – nil. the odds for the 1-0 score bet will change. that doesnt mean the person who made the bet, loses out because the score is now more likely- mid way through the match, coz his bet was put on before… thats ridiculous. the bets were put on the same time.
if it was wrong they should of said. and accumulators for even football can be related. having a football team with a late kick off who’ve now found they have to win to avoid being relegated after earlier scores does affect the players and the match…
‘such as the lampard example earlier… yes their related, but in a double, thats taken into account. not too different to an accumalator just a few more factors in the bet.
Oh my god get a grip some of some of you, ladbrokes never made a mistake, the cashier made a genuine mistake and was probably under pressure with loads of punters rushing up to the counter putting on bets on races going off. The tit who thought that snow falling in several cities wasn’t related and couldn’t be accepted in an accumulator doesn’t deserve sympathy, it’s like me saying that i want to bet on Man united to score over 3 goals, them to win 4-o, Rooney to score and to be winning at full time….your not going to get an accumulator because they are all related.