- This topic has 55 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
How can you exclude someone from a betting shop?
How is an irrelevant matter. It is a service that they (William Hill) offer. How they police it is their problem.
Interesting case.
I suspect that the high street chains owe a significant element of their success to the exploitation of people who become addicted to their offering.
They should be socially responsible in controlling the sale of their services to those who are no longer in control of their gambling habit. William Hill appear to accept this.
However, accepting that responsibility in terms of some well meaning verbage on a company report and translating it into a fixed set of terms and conditions which will be upheld by the law are two different things.
I suspect the punter will lose the case but it does open up the debate.
So this chap cannot get money from William Hill through his punting, now he tries to claim money using some pathetic claim.
I hope the case is thrown out of court, costs are awarded against him and he loses everything.
As you may have gathered I have absolutely no sympathy for this money grabbing bar steward.
Surely it would be in Hills interest to settle out of court.If they were to lose and there must be some chance that they will the reprecussions would be incredible.
Surely it would be in Hills interest to settle out of court.If they were to lose and there must be some chance that they will the reprecussions would be incredible.
They’d be nuts to do that, it would be an admission of guilt.
Anyway, they’re certain to win the case.
How certain 1/10 or 1/20.Settling out of court with no admission of liability is not an admission of guilt.
I’d make it 1/20: he admits to opening another account after barring himself from the first one: Hills will claim that they can’t be expected to watch every account. I hope as Corm says that the publicity leads to some meaningful safeguards for vulnerable people.
“Graham Calvert, 28, who began betting in August 2005 and set up an account with William Hill in May 2006, wants the betting agents to pay back his losses.
Mr Calvert, a respected greyhound trainer from Tyne and Wear who at one stage was earning up to £30,000 a month, initially bet £1,000 to £5,000 a time but this quickly grew to single bets of up to £30,000.
In May 2006, he claims he told William Hill that he wanted his account closed and his ‘self-exclusion’ appeal was taped by the bookmaker. He repeated this request a month later but was allowed to carry on betting until December.
…“
.
LGR, I can’t let this lie… is this a mis-quote or did he really open an account and in the same month ask them to stop taking bets from him?!!! Thats ludicrous.. The quote about him taking bin liners of cash into bookies is also surely complete rubbish… Money Laundering regs would never allow that..
How can someone who supposedly bets that much per day state they didn’t know they had a problem!!! Is he mental?!!
If he was bringing in carrier bags with £100k then WH can hardly claim they just did not notice him amongst the herd. The parties apparently made a contract between themselves, and one party has been badly damaged by the other party not fulfilling their side of the contract. I would say WH have dropped an unintentional managerial system clanger as bad as the free holidays for a hoover fiasco.
If he was bringing in carrier bags with £100k then WH can hardly claim they just did not notice him amongst the herd. The parties apparently made a contract between themselves, and one party has been badly damaged by the other party not fulfilling their side of the contract. I would say WH have dropped an unintentional managerial system clanger as bad as the free holidays for a hoover fiasco.
What contract?
Just wondering a few of things:
How did he manage to get such big sums on?
Should he also sue the people who lent him the money?
Did he use the Exchanges?
He wouldn’t be suing hills if he had used exchanges…
And as I said in a previous post he would never have got that amount of money on over a shop counter.. If he did Willy’s in the proverbial
The text was copied word for word from the Orange website, Aragorn (and I think the actual source is named at the bottom of the article).
He’s an addict, pure and simple, and I think the best thing for him would be to lose the case spectacularly.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.