Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    The Buzz's Avatar
    The Buzz is offline GPWA Gossip Hound
    Join Date
    February 2007
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    4,195
    Thanks
    412
    Thanked 1,867 Times in 1,146 Posts

    Default Man sues FanDuel Sportsbook for not letting him cash out deposit

    New Jersey native Paul Manganaro is suing FanDuel Sportsbook after he deposited money into his sports betting account to place a wager on the Super Bowl. He lost $200 – he bet on the Los Angeles Rams to cover at -4.5 – so he decided to withdraw his remaining $300 that he had deposited, not wanting to risk any more. But FanDuel wouldn’t let him.

    From Poker News Daily:

    According to Manganaro’s lawsuit, FanDuel would only let him cash out if he wagered that money. In gambling parlance, there was a “playthrough” requirement on his deposit.

    The natural reaction to hearing about this is probably, “That’s bullshit! It’s his money, so they should let him withdraw it,” and that’s a reasonable take. FanDuel does, however, have a clause on their FAQ that reads, “The withdrawal process is intended only for winnings. If you would like a refund on one of your recent deposits, please contact our support team via chat or email below.”

    So why would FanDuel have this policy? Why are customers committed to gambling all the money they deposit? Why can’t a customer change their mind (subject to contacting the support team)? The reason is money laundering. Put simply, it would be too easy for criminals to “wash” their money through a sportsbook by making a deposit, gambling a little bit for cover, then cashing out.

    Manganaro doesn’t buy that, though. He claims that FanDuel has violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act by requiring him to wager his own money before letting him cash out. He also accuses FanDuel of fraud and civil conspiracy and wants the company to return any requested funds to players plus treble damages.

    The lawsuit states that a major reason that he chose FanDuel was because the site promised he could “easily deposit and withdraw unused funds.
    Read more here: https://www.pokernewsdaily.com/new-j...deposit-35317/

  2. #2
    golfbettingsystem's Avatar
    golfbettingsystem is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    March 2014
    Location
    Bedfordshire
    Posts
    864
    Thanks
    174
    Thanked 399 Times in 281 Posts

    Default

    I get the argument about money laundering in principle, however I dare say someone looking to do that wouldn’t give up a 40% premium on their deposit to get it through.

    A lot of UK bookies only allow withdrawals to the same method as the deposit which would circumvent to a degree.

  3. #3
    LowFlyingBird's Avatar
    LowFlyingBird is offline Sponsor Affiliate Program
    Join Date
    July 2018
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    116
    Thanked 119 Times in 86 Posts

    Default

    same guy: Paul Manganaro
    https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...family-affair/


    In gambling parlance, there was a “playthrough” requirement on his deposit.
    Ignorance is bliss.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •