Man takes legal action after Betfred voids £1.7 million jackpot win

[The Buzz]

A Lincolnshire man is taking legal action against Betfred after it refused to payout a £1.7 million jackpot on an online blackjack game due to a "software malfunction" and claiming "no legitimate jackpot win occurred."

Andrew Green, 52, won the jackpot back in January. He said he confirmed the win with Betfred, but a few days later was told there had been a mistake. Following his win, Green said he extended his overdraft and spent more than £1,000 celebrating with family and friends.

From BBC:

A few days after confirming his win with Betfred he received a call from the firm's head office telling him it was void.

"It felt like I had been kicked and had my insides ripped out," he said.

Mr Green said he played the blackjack game for six hours before the win.

"Even if there was a malfunction that is not my fault - all I could do was press a button."

His solicitor, Peter Coyle, said Betfred refused to provide evidence of the glitch, despite repeated requests. In response, a spokesperson said: "Betfred loves to pay out all our jackpot winners - both big and small.

"Unfortunately, and as Mr Green is aware, a new game release... suffered a software malfunction in January this year and no legitimate jackpot win occurred. Given that Mr Green is currently exploring his legal options, it would be inappropriate for us to comment further."

Read more here: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-...shire-46281058

[FictionNet]

"Unfortunately, and as Mr Green is aware" - had to do a double-take there.

[baldidiot]

"Unfortunately, and as Mr Green is aware" - had to do a double-take there.

I did the same. Not confusing in the slightest...

[allfreechips]

New game and it did not work as expected I say is the fault of the software, they should pay him 1.7 mill just to hide the fact they use garbage

[RacingJim]

Following his win, Green said he extended his overdraft and spent more than £1,000 celebrating with family and friends.

I live by the rule "Don't spend money you haven't got".

I always only believe money is mine when it's sat in my bank account (and even then it's not 100% is it!).

[TheBartender]

I always only believe money is mine when it's sat in my bank account (and even then it's not 100% is it!).

100%.

This story reminds me of the woman that thought she won the jackpot but instead, the casino said it was a malfunction and offered her a free steak (I was going to share the link but can't yet as I'm a newbie).

[Cash Bonus]

That's totally unreasonable and inappropriate. He won the big jackpot and then this was confirmed with the casino itself. It makes no sense at all that only a few days later his winnings are voided. Shocking

[mathematician]

An interesting story

What exact game was he playing when it happened?

The BBC article at link above shows a graphic portraying the game
"Heart of The Frontier"


Another article cites it was Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven

http://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/ne...-taken-2243835

Worth a read that other article not least for the allegation of a £60 k offer from Betfred if the claimant were to "KEEP QUIET"


Could be the BBC decided to spice up their page with a photo shopped image?

Just my initial guess. I do not know.

Anyhow define the actual game and then one can start to judge how new it was.
Newness being cited as contributory cause by Betfred of course.
[ I thought all such stuff was tested and audited before public release but I know very little about slots etc ]

Then I winder how many other players were also impacted by playing on this bugged software.
Do Betfred intend to reimburse all of them for any losses they made while playing on software Betfred now claim to be dudd?
What measures did Betfred take to contact potentially impacted other players once they realised they had lost money to betfred on software that was prone to malfunction?
Does it go wider that Betfred?
More of a Playtech thing if it was indeed one of their games?

I have more questions than answers

[kidcards777]

"Unfortunately, and as Mr Green is aware" - had to do a double-take there.

Yep, good luck explaining that on a court of law

[mathematician]

Another quick thought.

Presumably a possible piece of evidence in any court case may be the betting records of Andrew Green whilst playing at betfred.
Note where he says in the LiconshireLive article that he was "playing on the app for six hours straight" and that he lost £2500 before the big win Mr Green would feel Betfred are currently welching on.

Just a train of thought..picture his longer term betting record being assessed by some credible expert
who may possibly state that his style of play was clearly showing worrying signs that a socially responsible bookmaker
should have picked up on acted on much earlier.

His longer term betting history could dictate whether that was a plausible statement or not.

But is this case brings to the public arena expert testimony that betfred were failing to adhere to standards about social responsibility
in their dealings with Mr Green could it in fact kick start a future big fine from the uk gambling commission on those grounds?

Potential money laundering check obligations are another item his longer term betting record could be assessed on by a credible expert witness.

The GC have been getting more and more aggressive with their fines of late for breaches in those two areas.
Many fines have exceed the 1.7 million winnings not paid out to Mr Allen.

As for this story it is a sort of David v Goliath battle.

David feels cheated by Goliath with Goliath refusing to do the honorable thing.
David has to struggle to raise cash to instigate his quest for justice.
Goliath wants to put more and more barriers of cost and time between David and the justice he seeks.

The story could probably be sexed up a bit with further character background on the Goliath Fred Done.
Has he habitually sought to self profit from trampling the small guy?

Two older stories would be

That of the very high interest loans he offered as a "special perk" to his betfred staff.
No doubt his hard working staff would have preferred better wages so they were not so skint and therefore had less need to very high interest loans.

Then there is the property development side of his business. I recall something recently where there were complaints that
he was somehow managing to get round social housing provision requirements in his developments via some form of jiggery pokery.

Undermining the character of a witness seems to be popular in tv court drams.
I have no idea how valid it is to this case.

But even if not valid for the court room it may be valid extra background info any media
reporting on the David v Goliath battle could use to frame the story.

Who knows where it may end up.
Perhaps with Fred Done running from BBC cameras and hiding in the toilet in Lord Ashcroft style in his attempt to avoid questions.

Extrapolation too far perhaps.

A long odds scenario.... just like winning a Jackpot at betfred slots.



Other Random Thoughts

What exactly was the precise this software malfunction cited by betfred?
The win was displayed to Mr Allen.
Presumably it was also displayed to the betfred staff who he says initially confirmed his win.
So it sounds as if his win was clearly logged in their system until manually edited by betfred staff to make the win now void.

Was there some flaw in the odds calculations by that game?
Perhaps a jackpot was likely one in every million spins instead of the desired one in two million for example?

But is such stuff not externally tested and verified as part of regulatory compliance?
Did the testers make mistake?
Or were the testers 100% spot on with what they tested but somehow
what was in use was not what was tested?

Veering strongly into science fiction conspiracy theory now
but imagine a future Volkswagon Emissions Scandle relating to casino RNG
testing and certification. In this imaginary world said software has a testing setting that sails through testing
but then also some secret adjustment is possible when it goes live to the public.
[ perhaps an internal mechanism dial like thing old style pokie machines would have had to permit owners to adjust payout percentages]


Sometimes however human error comes into play.
instead of fiddling settings to make a jackpot less likely than officially tested
a human muppet fiddles settings to increase the chance of a jackpot getting hit.

Then they refuse to payout citing software malfunction when in fact it
was a cheat bookmaker making human error mistake with his after official testing dial readjustments.

After the enquiry thousands of punters are then reimbursed for years of past casino losses.
Share prices in certain bookies and in certain gaming software providers crash through the floor.


All that is pure science fiction.
Just a crazy ficticeous story extrapolated to an extreme hilt from a small whiff of smoke
of the refusal to provide Mr Allen with any details of the software malfunction
apparantely at the root of his woes.

I am sure the likes of share ratings agencies who can have significant influence on share prices would
not be swayed greatly by such pieces of pure science fiction.
Possibly however they should send soemone to be in attendance at any future court case
just incase they can glean any extra insights and discussed facts that will better position them to more accurately judge
risk.


It could be of course that it never gets to court.

Perhaps Fred Done himself will step in as the champion of honor and justice
to correct an initial flawed judgement by one of his lower staff.

Said member of staff may even get sacked for their poor decision making.
No doubt he will be kind enough to offer them a high interest rate loan to tide them
over while seeking a new job

Fred Done our hero saves the day for our poor David character Mr Green.

Best wishes
Mick

[sweetbet]

100%.

This story reminds me of the woman that thought she won the jackpot but instead, the casino said it was a malfunction and offered her a free steak (I was going to share the link but can't yet as I'm a newbie).

I remember that story. https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/15/new...uit/index.html

I wonder what the outcome of her lawsuit was

[Pokerface]

Clearly he should be paid his winnings. Not to do so is a real hit against the provider and besides it is the right thing to do. If there was a glitch then next time the provider will be much more careful.