HE NEWS WIRES


11/20/2005
Zero Tolerance Policy in action against Sportingbet PLC


From: The Offshore Wire

Online Watchdog – Players Assistance Services

support@theoffshorewire.com





To:



British Chamber of Commerce

Attn. Mrs. Emmeline Owens

Fax. 0207 654 5819

e.owens@britishchambers.org.uk



Office of Fair Trading

Attn. Divisional Director MPI Mr. Jonathan May

jonathan.may@oft.gsi.gov.uk



I.B.A.S.

Attn. CEO Mr. Chris O’Keeffe

Fax. 020 7881 2695

postmaster@ibas-uk.co.uk



Haringey Council

Attn. Council Leader Mr. Charles Adje

F.a.o. 020 8881 5218

charles.adje@haringey.gov.uk



Sportingbet PLC

Attn. CEO Mr. Nigel Payne

NigelP@sportingbet.com



Cc:



Racing Post

internet@racingpost.co.uk



Times Online

business@thetimes.co.uk



Mirror

Attn. Mr. Andrew Penman

investigate@mirror.co.uk



Independent

businessnews@ independent.co.uk



Megastar

editor@megastar.co.uk





Miami, FL, United States, November 20th 2005



Re: Players vs. Sportingbet PLC – Three fraud complaints





Dear Sirs,



The Offshore Wire is a Watchdog Web site and online players assistance service that caters the gaming community and provides free assistance to gamblers who file complaints against sports books.



In the last few weeks we have been in receipt of numerous complaints with concern to sports books operating under the Sportingbet PLC bookmaking license.



After careful investigation we have come to determine that three complaints received are founded.



Despite the evidence Sportingbet PLC family of sports books refuse to amend decisions taken on non existent rules and maintain their position by seizing a player’s winnings ($7,500 – case TOW/05/314), not returning a player’s initial deposit and confiscating his winnings ($3,000 in deposits and/or $3,305.18 in winnings – case TOW/05/321), not awarding a portion of a sign up bonus initially promised in writing ($500 – case TOW/05/322).



Case TOW/05/314



Mr. A. G. vs. Sportsbook.com (Player’s ID 919251293) and Sportsbetting.com (Player’s ID 344916657)



Disputed amount: USD $ 7,500 in winnings . Books’ action – seizure of winnings



Player’s complaint:



I just got my accounts with sportsbook.com and sportsbetting.com deactivated and all the money I won taken with just my original deposit returned. I called in and some floor supervisor named Carrie told me that I was placing both sides of a game and therefore all my profits would be taken. I had almost 7500 in profits, and the bets that this guy was talking about made up only a fraction of those winnings. This guy Carrie said that it didn't matter and that all management decisions were final.



TOW findings – none of the above mentioned sports books have a specific rule that allows them to confiscate winnings as per the above mentioned events.





Case TOW/05/321



Mr. P. D. vs. Sportsbetting.com (Player’s ID 367516332), Sports.com (Player’s ID 492443810), Playersonly.com (Player’s ID 29975642), Allstars.com (Player’s ID unavailable)



Dispute amount: USD $ 3,305.18 in winnings. Book’s action (Sportsbetting.com) – winnings confiscation.



Or



Disputed amount: USD $ 3,000 in deposits. Books’ actions (Sports.com, Playersonly.com, Allstars.com) – unavailable to return initial deposits.



Player’s complaint:



At the beginning of the Football season I was looking around the internet for bookmakers to bet with during the season. I searched the internet and I found many bookmakers that I eventually joined. The bookmakers in question here had many different websites with different names, so I joined some of them and bet with different ones.



I made initial deposit of $1000 each into 4 of these bookmakers; sports.com, playersonly.com, allstar.com and sportsbetting.com. In the first three I lost each of my initial deposits, but in sportsbetting.com I
won $3305.18, giving me a total balance of $4305.18.



The next day I went to withdrawal these funds and everything seemed to be processed fine, until later that day I received an email saying my sportsbetting.com account has been closed and that only my initial deposit of $1000 would be returned. I called them to see what was going on and they informed me that they closed my accounts because I had more than one account with them. I assured them I only had one sportsbetting.com account from which they informed me that they advertise there business around the internet with different names, unbeknown to me. All these four account happened to be the same company.

I argued, how they could just close my accounts and not pay out any winnings, but the phone operator pointed out in their terms and conditions that accounts may be closed at any time with all transactions being voided and initial deposits returned. Now I understood this to be all transactions winning ones or losing ones, so I believe they should return all my deposits from the other 3 accounts at the very least or pay my winnings from the sportsbetting.com account.




The reason they gave me for not returning all 4 deposits is that I didn’t wager anything in the sportsbetting.com account and they can't return funds when the account balance is $0, as in the other 3 accounts. This claim by them is completely wrong, as I stated above I won over $3300, and wagered almost $4000 in one weekend in the sportsbetting.com account. When I came back to them with this claim they just said no more queries regarding this matter will be entertained and the management's decision is final.



TOW findings – none of the above mentioned sports books lists in their rules that players may not hold accounts at any other Sportingbet PLC affiliate nor none of the above mentioned sports books rules provide a list of all Sportingbet PLC affiliates. Therefore the player is fully entitled to his winnings;



Or



Should the inexistent rule stand, the player is fully entitled to a full refund of his four initial deposits since sportsbetting.com applied the inexistent rule retroactively, which obviously obliges other affiliate sports books to retroactively cancel the player’s wagering activity and therefore entitles him to a full refund of his initial deposits.



Case TOW/05/322



Mr. P. T. vs. Aces.com (Player’s ID 998703378)



Disputed amount: USD $ 500 (bonus) . Book’s decision – will not honor its original written commitment.



Player’s complaint:



The player, shopping for a new sports book to wager with, was induced to deposit $ 10,000 with Aces.com because of this chat he entertained with a book’s representative:



Begins.

Chat Information Please wait for a site operator to respond.

Chat Information You are now chatting with 'Jim'

Jim: How may I help you today?

P: hello. I am looking at opening up an account. What type of sign up

bonus do you offer?

Jim: There is a 15% Free Bonus Cash to your first deposit using Neteller,

Firepay or ACH!

Jim: (10% with any other method)

P: what is your neteller merchant code?

Jim: You will need to ring in to obtain this. The number is 1888 675 2237

P: ok

P: is there a maximum bonus amount that I can get?

Jim: The maximum is 15%

P: up to how much?

Jim: There is no maximum deposit amount!

P: so if I deposit $10,000 I can get $1,500 bonus?

Jim: That is correct

Jim: Providing you use Neteller, Firepay or ACH

P: ok

P: and do I need to request the bonus after I make the deposit or is it

added automatically?

Jim: It is done automatically

P: ok thank you

Jim: Thanks for chatting. We are available 24/7 to chat here and assist you

with your questions.

P: thanks

Ends.



Further to his deposit via Neteller, the player was awarded only 10%. TheOffshoreWire inquired with the book on the case and received the following reply:



Begins.

Thank you for contacting us.

We do apologize for any misinformation which was received by your client
from our Customer Service Representative. This was an unfortunate and rare
occurrence.

The terms and conditions of the bonus, which was posted on the Aces.com
site, clearly stated that for deposits over $5,000.00, the bonus would be 10%.



This issue has been reviewed by our Accounting and Marketing Departments and
the decision will not be revised.

We apologize for any inconvenience caused to your client.

Thank you for your time.

Best Regards,
Hilary

Ends



TOW findings – the player obviously surfed Aces.com Web site and directly asked one of the book’s representatives about their sign up conditions. The book’s representative provided the player a binding offer, ensuring that the bonus percentage agreed upon would have been duly credited to the player’s account, since the player was induced to deposit with this company by the book’s representative initial offer. Under revised conditions (10%) the player might have passed and signed up with a different company.



Once the player deposited bonus conditions were changed to the player’s detriment. This case perfectly fits in a commercial undue practice framework. Obviously the player is fully entitled to his $ 500 bonus and/or to be fully refunded of his initial deposit.



Conclusions



All three above mentioned cases represent a violation of commercial ethics and the company’s stated rules. The financial damages these three customers of Sportingbet PLC incurred into shall be fully compensated by a revision of the involved sports books’ initial decisions.



Recommendations



Should Sportingbet PLC reserve the right not to amend the three above mentioned cases we recommend the following:



Office of Fair trading – open a formal investigation on Sportingbet PLC business practices;



Haringey Council Licensing Board – holder of Sportingbet PLC bookmaking license – suspend Sportingbet PLC bookmaking license for unethical business practice.



Further actions



TheOffshoreWire.com, a division of Web Game Consultants N.V., a Curacao incorporated Limited Liability Company is committed to represent the above mentioned individuals against Sportingbet PLC.



In view of the foregoing we are planning to retain a U.K. based Attorney to oppose the renewal of Sportingbet PLC bookmaking license and undertake all other actions that our to be appointed legal representative will deem necessary and due, including but not limited to request liens to protect sums due to the company’s creditors.



Awaiting to read you soon, I remain.



Sincerely,



Roberto Castiglioni

The Offshore Wire
http://http://theoffshorewire.com/ar...6;aspx?AID=841