- This topic has 7 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Not just deplorable ethics but rank ####ing stupidity when there is so much protest over FOBTs – this has to be the ultimate in short-termism
The nasty, cyncial messages contained within their “but we’re only joking” adverts finally exposed as a seriously sordid, and evil organisation. They are the factory farmers of the bookmaking industry.
They don’t treat their staff particularly well, either. A friend of mine is a union rep and says that he has more cases from Paddy Power than any other bookmaker. I’ve no reason to think that he’s making it up.
“In one case, Paddy Power admitted that senior staff encouraged a man with a gambling problem to keep betting despite warnings by more junior employees.”
This is absolutely deplorable behaviour and they should have their licence suspended immediately just for that alone.
Rancid firm.
Not just deplorable ethics but rank ####ing stupidity when there is so much protest over FOBTs – this has to be the ultimate in short-termism
Hopefully that will be the benefit of Power’s avariciousness – Increased opposition to FOBTs.
Blows away the so called responsible betting campaign they are part of, the sooner these machines are removed the better
Sometime in 2012 a punter requests self-exclusion from his Paddy Power account. Punter subsequently bets with PP using a second account opened years earlier. Punter wins £3,000 via account #2 and requests withdrawal of same. PP refuse to pay punter saying he shouldn’t have been betting so his bets on account #2 are null and void. PP goes on to say that if punter had lost on account #2 he would have been reimbursed. The Bookmakers Review essentially doesn’t believe PP on the latter issue and so removes PP from its Green List. (I have no idea what that is.)
Then they go and spoil it all by reversing its ruling on the basis of feedback from three people. They all claim to have received reimbursment of funds lost while excluded. No details are supplied.
Frankly I refuse to believe that PP, at that time, were in the habit of refunding stakes on losing bets to self-excluded punters. If anyone knows different then please let me know.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.