Bet company settlement - are they now liable?

[dido]

I meant second chance above. Typo.

[des8]

But the loss of chance follows the loss of the free bets.
There is no loss of chance without loss of free bets. so I could see they should run together


But hey I've been wrong before!

[dido]

No the loss of the free bets happened afterwards

[dido]

des8 the free bets were to be used to place the bets which are the subject of the loss of chance claim.

Having mucked that up, they then closed my account where the free bets were sitting, waiting to be used, based on the lie of verbal abuse of their staff.

[des8]

This has been a long thread, and I don't intend rereading it!
I understood that you had a dispute with the company.
It was settled with an offer of cash and free bets, which you accepted.
On the basis of that you bought information from a tipster but were unable to place those bets because the betting company had subsequently closed your account.
The tips went on to win.

I would make it one claim
They broke a settlement offer which caused you a subsequent loss.
Why go through two court cases?

[dido]

Lol thank you for all your help des8 . To clarify - they did not place the free bets in my account and so I could not use the tips I purchased which would have gone on to win. that is the Loss of the chance.

The current case is something I never even brought up here in this thread as it happened afterwards - i.e. their closing my account without my using the 1K of free bets which were in there. That's what the current Court case is pursuing.

[des8]

I'm easily confused:
" they did not place the free bets in my account "
"their closing my account without my using the 1K of free bets which were in there."

Is there not a contradiction there?

[dido]

I'm easily confused:
" they did not place the free bets in my account "
"their closing my account without my using the 1K of free bets which were in there."

Is there not a contradiction there?

No. They DID place the free bets in the account...eventually. And then they closed it.

[dido]

Hello all.

I am ready to litigate this matter now. As you might recall, I am holding this bookmaker responsible for telling me I would have free bet credit available to use on a given day and this in fact was not the case.

I lost money I could have won betting using these funds, and am suing for these lost winnings. This is a loss of chance case.

des8*you previously stated I might have a case given that I only need to show I relied on the (incorrect) information. I am wondering whether the other side could argue that time was not stated by me of being of the essence, and what would be my counter argument to this? did it need to be stated as such?

[des8]

I haven't read back (84 posts!) and can't think why time should be of the essence.
Why do you think they may try and use it as an argument?
I recall you were given some free bets which were not available when you went to use them.
Your chosen results following a paid tipster's advice & using those free bets would have won you a considerable amount.

[dido]

Exactly des8
*but they have told me that their stating I would have access to the free bets that day is not good enough to claim loss of chance. They have told me I should have told them that I NEEEDED them that day. They think that I was obligated to tell them that time was of the essence.*

[des8]

That sounds like a legal team grasping at straws to me

[dido]

I thought so too. So if I relied on them when they told me that "the bets would be available that day" and they were not, they could not state later "well, he didn't tell us that timing was important"? It is enough that I relied on their information?

[des8]

For time to be of the essence, it needs to be so stated within the contract, altho' in some contracts it could be implied (eg when dealing with perishable goods)

[jaguarsuk]

I've not read back the whole thread, but as I understand it you paid for tips and couldn't place free bets that were part of a settlement.

Rather than the winning amount, I think you'll end up with the value of the free bets you were denied and the amount you paid for the tips.

I have been wrong before, but I just don't see a judge awarding the winnings.