- This topic has 49 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
The response:
Dear (Sir),
Thank you for your e-mail.
Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience this situation has caused you.
At the time that the transfer to the Australian wallet was made, a message would have appeared to inform you that your Betfair account would need to be KYC’d before any funds could be transferred to the UK wallet, from the Australian wallet.
As previously stated by my colleague, our Terms and Conditions allow us to request the identification documents at any point during the life of the Betfair account. This is to ensure the integrity and security of the Betfair site.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any further enquiries.
Kind regards,
Dominic Nolan
<br>(sent 12:14PM today)<br>————————————————
Well that is strange becuase I can swear that no pop up appeared on my screen telling me this. Absolutely no way. It transferred it without any sort of pop up and would not let me transfer it back.
However they did try to call my mobile when I was on a train a little while ago and are ringing back in the imminent future. Should be interesting.
fsl,
suggest that if they start talking terms and conditions, then you start saying:
– how can you rely on ANY terms and conditions when you seem not to be complying with the Financial Services Act as regards deposit-taking ?
– the FSA wouldn’t allow you to withhold funds via any  "Australian wallet" mallarkey if you were registered with them, like a bank
–  i want my money back now and would rather not have to call in the FSA to investigate what you’re doing, but you’re leaving me no option
– my rent is due tomorrow: decide now.
<br>- you do appreciate that if my legal advice on this point is right, the FSA could come in and shut down your whole business?   then you’d have no option but to repay me and everyone else you’d taken deposits from.
best regards
wit
(Edited by wit at 7:25 pm on Dec. 6, 2006)
I got the phone call 10 minutes ago and the issue has been resolved so thanks for your help Wit and Dave Jay. On a very interesting sidenote, the customer services manager also is a regular reader of The Racing Forum!:o Work that one out for yourself!
Glad to see that common sense has prevailed. BF usually see reason after reviewing all the info.<br>
Awesome performance by Wit.
Does this mean that Betfair have since changed their Terms & Conditions? I somehow doubt it……..
FSL,
In response to your thread title – you were indeed ‘being screwed around’. The problem is most Customer Service reps get this sense of ‘Power Madness’ and refuse to look into the issue and take great pleasure in telling you via – e-mail ‘to **** off’ comply or die attititude. Personally I hate them – it usually takes some threat of legal action to get their sorry assess into gear.
All hail WIT ;) :biggrin: :cool:
(Edited by Sailing Shoes at 6:07 am on Dec. 9, 2006)
No they haven’t changed their terms and conditions SS but I think some addresses can be validated via the electoral register and that’s why some people don’t need to do the checks.
Mmm .. since when has the Electoral Role included photographs and credit card details ??
It sounds to me like they are asking for information that they are not entitled to, or have any right to ask for and they know it.
Well done to all concerned, especially wit. It’s nice to see a happy ending at Christmas time.
Yes and fair play to Betfair in the end who gave me my money back. They could of refused and made things difficult but it wouldn’t of been worth the hassle for either party really. Thanks for your help Wit.
I’m surprised, but glad, that you got your money back FSL.<br>Well done, and excellent advice from wit. Class act.
Many thanks for the kind words.
I suspect though, along with Swallow Cottage, that it was probably mainly a question of BF itself finding the time to focus.
Coincidentally, BF does seem to have consolidated and amended its terms and conditions in tandem with launching its new interface – though not on the point raised, which anyway basically is beyond being addressed by private contract. ÂÂÂ
<br>One approach might be to seek legal advice to give a political back-stop of sorts (if not quite a justification) for existing practice, while pursuing a broader industry solution with the Gambling Commission ahead of, or soon after, next September’s implementation of the new Gambling Act.
Another would be just to let sleeping dogs lie unless / until they actually showed signs of waking and biting in some way.
Will watch with interest, but wouldn’t particularly expect to see anything public on the point anytime soon.
best regards
wit
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.