The bookies never paid me for Kahn on points, what should I do ?

In this kind of case the biggest weapon a punter has is embarrasment. There is in the gambling world a thing called bad press. I would imagine they would pay up pretty fast if they thought Buncey was going to mention their refusal to pay out on his show. But they are well aware that they hold nearly all the cards in this argument. It is worth writing in for clarification, because the person who refused to payout could also have made a mistake.

 

Apart from laws specifically covering bookmakers, there is also the question of whether bookmakers are exempt from laws covering deception offences.

Unless the laws governing these offences (e.g. false advertising,) make speciic exemptions for bookies (which is highly unlikely,) then they are subject to them the same as any other business. Businesses, Industries, any form of organisation and even in some cases individuals can have their ethics, codes of practice or forms of self regulation but they cannot pick and choose what laws they are subject to.

I am surprised if it wasn't until 2005 that the laws specifically governing bookies made it clear that bet slips could be considered legal contracts, but even beore that it would still be illegal for them not to pay up because they are violating other laws by taking the bet effectively on a false premise.

Gentlemans agreements only really work in situations which are not legally enforceable, for example the agreement by the four home football associations not to pick each others players even though they all hold the same passport and so could meet the Fifa definition of nationality for any of the four.

Riggers, my aplogies if you took offence, though I still think I was ultimately correct. I mistook you as one of the anti-gambling brigade, who often seem to post on similar threads saying '**** you, it's your own fault' whenever someone looses money.

 

No worries Billy, like you i think its amazing that the law took till 2005. Even today the casinos are based on a gentlemans agreement. I also have yet to see anything that says the Bookies have to pay out on bets. No offence taken, and i am certainly not anti gambling in any way.

 

Incorrect. The Gaming Act 1845 specifically stated that gambling debts were not legally enforceable:

This was not repealed until the Gambling Act 2005 came into effect in 2007.

 

There probably isn't but at the same time, there probably isn't a law saying e.g. it's illegal to steal a DVD player. But if you stole one you would be breaking a law that says it's illegal to take another persons property.
Similarly it might not say in law Bookies must pay bets but will say somewhere businesses must provide the service they adverise.

I suppose that's why lawyers get paid the big bucks, if they can fathom all this ****.

 

What i meant by the comment you highlighted was that there is plenty saying that gambling debts cannot be legally upheld. A winning bet is a gambling debt. I think what you say is 100% correct from an ethics stand point, but if the law changed in 2007 as cobbler says and that before that gambling debts were not legally enforcable, then the bookies would have broken no law. It stinks regardless.

 

In 1845 only certain forms of gambling were legal, e.g. you could only bet on horse racing at a horse track.

There was another gambling act in 1960 which made gambling legal in general and not just in specific places, and (implicitly,) subjected bookies to the same law as the rest of us. (Not that any of you are interested but my Grandad was a bookie when it was illegal and the law got changed).

 

There are often misconceptions with these things because of other regulations. It's totally different but many moons ago I used to drive taxi's and was told by hundreds of people including city councillors that taxi vehicles didn't need an MOT certificate because the test they had to pass to get their plate was more severe.

I only found this wasn't true when I got nicked for driving a taxi that didn't have an MOT and my lawyer told me that MOT law didn't actually make any exeptions.

As I say it's a totally different but you'll see the connection.

Even if there was a law saying bets don't have to be paid, there is another saying you can't advertise a service you fail to provide. A bookie could still be breaking this law even if another law said they didn't have to pay up.

 

Bookies are *******s,as somone else said on here ask to see thier rules and then decide hat to do.Have you rung them and asked to speak with a manager.If not and you do make sure you get his or her name.I stopped using the big name bookies a few years ago and now go to a local firm which has 4 or 5 shops in the area.They are much easier and nicer to deal with.I had Rahman to beat Lewis(didnt really belive it would happen,i looked like a true boxing expert for a while)and Ladbrooke tried to make out id already been in and had my money,it was pathetic but got sorted in the end.Ive never been in since though.