Ladbrokes

[huwa]

Hello,

I came across your site on Google. Maybe someone could offer some info on my situation.

I am a sports bettor. I have used Ladbrokes.com (along with their exchange for approximately 9 months). I have received tens of withdrawals in the past however this last withdrawal was not processed and my account has been suspended.

I have not received any email from them.

I have sent them numerous emails over the last 10 days with no response. No returned phone calls etc either.

I will be sending them a Letter Before Action tomorrow and intend to pursue them via the Small Claims Court here in the UK.

Does anyone know why Ladbrokes would suspend an account and then completely ignore a customer? I know their customer service has a poor reputation however this is something else.

Does anyone have suggestions of how to get a response from them without having to go to court? I really shouldn't have to be doing this..

Regards
H

See Related Threads:

• Ladbrokes and The Spirit of the Promotion Condition....
• Ladbrokes Simple Don't Want To Pay
• Entain Could Use Their License
• Akimobalola vs. Ladbrokes
• Ladbrokes.com Suspended My Account....

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hello,

I came across your site on Google. Maybe someone could offer some info on my situation.

I am a sports bettor. I have used Ladbrokes.com (along with their exchange for approximately 9 months). I have received tens of withdrawals in the past however this last withdrawal was not processed and my account has been suspended.

I have not received any email from them.

I have sent them numerous emails over the last 10 days with no response. No returned phone calls etc either.

I will be sending them a Letter Before Action tomorrow and intend to pursue them via the Small Claims Court here in the UK.

Does anyone know why Ladbrokes would suspend an account and then completely ignore a customer? I know their customer service has a poor reputation however this is something else.

Does anyone have suggestions of how to get a response from them without having to go to court? I really shouldn't have to be doing this..

Regards
H

You could try sending them a formal letter by post (recorded delivery) telling them that they have failed to respond several times to your complaint, and that unless they respond within the next 14 days, you will take them to the small claims court. Hopefully, this should open up a communications channel between you without having to go to court.

Sometimes though, the only way to get a company to deal with a complaint is to book the court case and wait till the court serves the papers on them. This often "calls their bluff", and works with many companies like banks, energy firms, and telecoms providers. They are anxious not to let a matter go before a judge, so this is when they try their very best to settle with a customer without it going before a court.

Ladbrokes is a well known high street name, so they won't want a court judgement being made against them that will appear on public record, and that could affect the firm's ability to obtain a UK licence, which will shortly become necessary.

As with many other famous high street names, their online service is licenced offshore. Your chances are greater because your dispute is with the sports betting side, not the casino.

 

[huwa]

Hi Vinyl,

Thanks for the reply. The letter before action will be going out today recorded giving them 14 days to respond to me. I don't mind it going to court but obviously it is a waste of my time. But if that is what it takes, I am more than willing to do it. Just a shame really that such a big name thinks it is acceptable to hold customer's funds and ignore them.

On another note, I am sure I recognise your username - maybe from the old superarcadia?

H

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi Vinyl,

Thanks for the reply. The letter before action will be going out today recorded giving them 14 days to respond to me. I don't mind it going to court but obviously it is a waste of my time. But if that is what it takes, I am more than willing to do it. Just a shame really that such a big name thinks it is acceptable to hold customer's funds and ignore them.

On another note, I am sure I recognise your username - maybe from the old superarcadia?

H

Yes, I remember that!


So, what exactly did you do to incur the wrath of Ladbrokes? Empty one of their fruities?

I doubt they will let things get as far as court, but this doesn't mean they will budge, just that they will know that they can't simply ignore the issue, as this would almost guarantee a court ruling going against them (your side of the story would be put before the judge, and they would not be submitting theirs).

As you have been betting and withdrawing for a while already, it can't be down to the usual issues such as problems with ID verification etc.

One thing that is known to cause this type of situation is if they discover that you have charged back a deposit to any other casino or betting site, or even charged back to them in the past. Gambling sites take this kind of thing VERY seriously, and share data on players who have charged back losses throughout the industry.

If you can't get anything out of them with the letter, there are a couple more options you could try before going to court, such as using a dispute resolution service. For sports betting, there are options that are not open to casino players, who in many cases are advised not to bother with complaining to regulators in Malta and Gibraltar as it's a waste of time (they tend to side with the casinos that pay the licencing fees, which is a significant source of income for these small territories).

 

[huwa]

Hi,

I might have emptied one of their fruities in the past but certainly not using any of those RF chip manipulators!

I am genuinely not sure what I've done for them to react like this. No chargebacks or anything like that. I use ewallets - don't think chargebacks are even possible with ewallets? It would help if they would reply to me, maybe then I would have an idea.

For sports betting, there is IBAS and their regulator. Both are useless and not impartial. I won't even waste my time with these.

As far as I can see, my best option is to continue with intended court action and be sure to post my full story on every forum I can find to warn people.

I will keep you updated.

Regards
H

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi,

I might have emptied one of their fruities in the past but certainly not using any of those RF chip manipulators!

I am genuinely not sure what I've done for them to react like this. No chargebacks or anything like that. I use ewallets - don't think chargebacks are even possible with ewallets? It would help if they would reply to me, maybe then I would have an idea.

For sports betting, there is IBAS and their regulator. Both are useless and not impartial. I won't even waste my time with these.

As far as I can see, my best option is to continue with intended court action and be sure to post my full story on every forum I can find to warn people.

I will keep you updated.

Regards
H

You should hold off from mass posting as it could work against you if Ladbrokes DO turn up in court and claim that you tried to blackmail them by posting a one sided account "all over the internet".

It is possible (theoretically) to effect a chargeback for an eWallet deposit. The player charges back their funding of an eWallet account, and the eWallet reacts by passing the chargeback onto the merchants who benefitted from the money. As far as an operator is concerned, it's still a chargeback.

It may be worth contacting the eWallet and asking whether they know of any reason for this action by Ladbrokes.

PS - Daz Watts' RF devices were bullshit, just an LED soldered on to a plastic fob with a battery inside. Refill keys work to some extent, but their main function is to alert the arcade staff as to your intent, so that they can chuck you out. They also alert other players that they have a "pro" in their midst, so they will not fill any machines up for you, and will lie if you ask "has this paid out recently?" in order to trick you into filling it back up for them.

 

[huwa]

Yes - I will only post the information after the matter has (hopefully) been resolved. I have emailed the ewallet but no response yet, no problems with my account though.

(I had a refill key once. Not much use other than turning the volume up I assume/hope everyone knew his devices were not real. From what I remember, his real address and picture were found out and posted all over various forums which led to the closure of his sites.)

 

[vinylweatherman]

Yes - I will only post the information after the matter has (hopefully) been resolved. I have emailed the ewallet but no response yet, no problems with my account though.

(I had a refill key once. Not much use other than turning the volume up I assume/hope everyone knew his devices were not real. From what I remember, his real address and picture were found out and posted all over various forums which led to the closure of his sites.)

He tried to threaten me for exposing his devices on Superarcadia, but it backfired spectacularly because he threatened he would seek carnal knowledge of my niece if I didn't shut up, and managed to correctly name her. Unfortunately for him, he should also have researched her AGE, as he had just admitted to being a Paedo I was far from threatened by such ineptness. However, I did wonder how he had managed to get the name right on the first attempt, it wasn't shown on 192.com as she wasn't anywhere near 18 at the time.

He could still be around, and may be selling devices that when placed on your monitor will cause online casino games to keep paying out

 

[dunover]

Hi Vinyl,

Thanks for the reply. The letter before action will be going out today recorded giving them 14 days to respond to me. I don't mind it going to court but obviously it is a waste of my time. But if that is what it takes, I am more than willing to do it. Just a shame really that such a big name thinks it is acceptable to hold customer's funds and ignore them.

On another note, I am sure I recognise your username - maybe from the old superarcadia?

H

Court action will be doomed to failure if you don't follow the industry's own arbitration process first. Ladbrokes could use this fact to stay any case.
Similarly you won't win an Employment Tribunal very often unless you first exhausted the company's own appeals process.

Don't listen to the barrack-room lawyers, go through the appropriate bodies first.

 

[kidgloves]

Superarcadia became a shadow of its former self once the flame wars got going. Not unlike the way one of the other current forums is going. It's a shame that once valid and enlightening forums where debate and banter was really positive can descend into such drivel for the most part so quickly.

Best of luck with the Ladbrokes problems. I used to play slots on there a lot, and remember racking up 1000 free spins on one of their promos connected to the newly launched Thunderstruck II at the time. After that I had some rather sharp financial exchanges with Track and Field Mouse which made me search for new on line gaming homes.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Court action will be doomed to failure if you don't follow the industry's own arbitration process first. Ladbrokes could use this fact to stay any case.
Similarly you won't win an Employment Tribunal very often unless you first exhausted the company's own appeals process.

Don't listen to the barrack-room lawyers, go through the appropriate bodies first.

They could, but they are flatly refusing to respond to the OP, so are not engaging with their own complaint process. Non response can be classed as a state of "deadlock" just as a "this is our final decision" reply can.

Small claims court is not so "stuffy" as main court, and judges understand that this is where consumers go for a simple no-frills hearing about relatively minor amounts. A solicitor is not necessary, and this is part of the design strategy of small claims, it allows consumers access to justice without them having to fork out for a solicitor.

The "formal letter" is part of the strategy, failing to respond to a letter that the plaintiff can prove arrived (recorded delivery) can be used to show that the company is not engaging with the customer, and they can be asked why this is the case in court.

I don't believe this will go anywhere near a court, the letter is a strategy designed to force their hand and make them reply to the issue at hand. It will also make them have another look at the case as they may have to justify their decision in court.

The OP should really at least go through the motions with IBAS, even though they feel it's pointless. Not at least trying could leave a weakness in their case should Ladbrokes decide they WILL allow it to go before a court.

This is much the same strategy that some UK players used against Betfair in the "Happy Hour" fiasco that earned them a place in the rogue pit. Betfair said "no" to arbitrators, refused to abide by PAB decisions, and ended up being dropped from Accredited to Rogue. IBAS was pretty useless too, but a court summons did the trick, they started paying up as soon as they got one, they were very anxious not to let even one of the cases get to court. It also appears that they used "gagging clauses" when agreeing to pay players, which is why so little has been heard about this.

 

[dunover]

They could, but they are flatly refusing to respond to the OP, so are not engaging with their own complaint process. Non response can be classed as a state of "deadlock" just as a "this is our final decision" reply can.

Small claims court is not so "stuffy" as main court, and judges understand that this is where consumers go for a simple no-frills hearing about relatively minor amounts. A solicitor is not necessary, and this is part of the design strategy of small claims, it allows consumers access to justice without them having to fork out for a solicitor.

The "formal letter" is part of the strategy, failing to respond to a letter that the plaintiff can prove arrived (recorded delivery) can be used to show that the company is not engaging with the customer, and they can be asked why this is the case in court.

I don't believe this will go anywhere near a court, the letter is a strategy designed to force their hand and make them reply to the issue at hand. It will also make them have another look at the case as they may have to justify their decision in court.

The OP should really at least go through the motions with IBAS, even though they feel it's pointless. Not at least trying could leave a weakness in their case should Ladbrokes decide they WILL allow it to go before a court.

This is much the same strategy that some UK players used against Betfair in the "Happy Hour" fiasco that earned them a place in the rogue pit. Betfair said "no" to arbitrators, refused to abide by PAB decisions, and ended up being dropped from Accredited to Rogue. IBAS was pretty useless too, but a court summons did the trick, they started paying up as soon as they got one, they were very anxious not to let even one of the cases get to court. It also appears that they used "gagging clauses" when agreeing to pay players, which is why so little has been heard about this.

Isn't that pretty much EXACTLY what I just said in the post you quoted, but in one sentence??

 

[huwa]

IBAS will not help in such circumstances and claim they won't help with payout disputes (They also took 2 months when I used them before).
As far as I can see, there is no genuine alternative to this. Even if IBAS helped, I shouldn't need to wait for 2 months before I can move on with my case.
I have emailed 20+ times, made phone calls & live chatted. They won't acknowledge or respond to me. I really think I have tried my best.

 

[dunover]

IBAS will not help in such circumstances and claim they won't help with payout disputes (They also took 2 months when I used them before).
As far as I can see, there is no genuine alternative to this. Even if IBAS helped, I shouldn't need to wait for 2 months before I can move on with my case.
I have emailed 20+ times, made phone calls & live chatted. They won't acknowledge or respond to me. I really think I have tried my best.

And what about the Licensing Authority?

 

[huwa]

They have told me I need to exhaust Ladbrokes' internal complaints procedure. Ladbrokes claim they don't have such a thing.
(I also believe they are not impartial)

 

[vinylweatherman]

They have told me I need to exhaust Ladbrokes' internal complaints procedure. Ladbrokes claim they don't have such a thing.
(I also believe they are not impartial)

They MUST have such a thing, else they are in breach of their licence. Do you have this statement from them in writing, such as an email?

 

[huwa]

I requested my complaint be escalated to their Solutions Team as stated in their complaints procedures (

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

). I requested this but was told they didn't have a Solutions Team. This was on Live Chat. E-mails go unanswered.

They now do not respond or acknowledge my e-mails so it's impossible to "exhaust" their internal complaints procedure.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I requested my complaint be escalated to their Solutions Team as stated in their complaints procedures (

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

). I requested this but was told they didn't have a Solutions Team. This was on Live Chat. E-mails go unanswered.

They now do not respond or acknowledge my e-mails so it's impossible to "exhaust" their internal complaints procedure.

You should include this live chat response in your letter as it shows they blocked you from using the internal complaints procedure. They continue to block you from the procedure by refusing to deal any further with you. This is a state of deadlock. Them refusing to go through their own internal complaints procedures will be bad for THEM in court, and they should know it. It won't be front line CS or live chat dealing with your letter, but their legal department.

You could complain to IBAS not about payouts, but about them failing to follow the procedures laid out in their terms and conditions, which will also be a requirement of their licence (to have, and go through, an internal complaints procedure). If IBAS formally reject your complaint, you then have evidence to show the court that you have already tried to resolve the issue through the specified procedures, and that this has failed.

You would probably have had more luck after Oct 1st, as you could then have complained to the UKGC about Ladbrokes not having, or going through, an internal complaints procedure they are required to have. It will also be harder for IBAS to claim it's out of their jurisdiction, which is often the case when UK brands run their online betting through an offshore subsidiary.

 

[huwa]

Just an update to this.
Ladbrokes actually tried to steal the money from me. Even wrote me a letter stating their intention based upon a ridiculous t&c which would not be enforceable in the real world.
I ended up contacting the Gibraltar small claims court and enquiring about a hearing. In the right circumstances, non attendance would be possible although I would have attended anyway. They did emphasise about using the Gibraltar regulator first.
I submitted a complaint to the Gibraltar regulator who at first wouldn't pursue it because I hadn't 'exhausted' ladbrokes' complaints procedure. Of course it's impossible to do this if ladbrokes refuse to reply to my emails, letters etc. in the end, the regulator emailed senior management there and I was told they would contact me. Two weeks went by and of course no replies to emails again. I followed it up with the regulator again and was paid 24 hours later.
In this case the reason they paid was pressure from the regulator in my opinion.
It's all over for me now (apart from a subject access request under the DPA I have pending with them) thankfully. I'll also want to be refunded postage costs for all the letters I sent them.
Ladbrokes really are the lowest of the low in my opinion. Complete scum.

 

[catapultaudio]

EDIT: no idea how I missed the last post, or the fact this thread was weeks old.. but still surprised PAB was not mentioned. Glad you got paid, and I must also say, ladbrokes has gone waaay downhill of late. CS quality nosedived, terrible promotions regime now, and worst of all, nag nag nag to deposit the minute you log in.

Surprised nobody has suggested yet that you might consider using the pitch a bitch service offered at casinomeister. This is a free dispute resolution service where this site will try and mediate a resolution to your case without having to go through the time and expense of a court case. Unfortunately your the second person in a week to come here with open intentions of going to court, and it was said on that case that mentioning this straight away on the forum may hinder the PAB process somewhat, but if you have not yet sent that letter before action, I'd recommend checking out the PAB/pitch-a-bitch pages here right now, I'm confident Ladbrokes would respond to a request for information from CM.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Just an update to this.
Ladbrokes actually tried to steal the money from me. Even wrote me a letter stating their intention based upon a ridiculous t&c which would not be enforceable in the real world.
I ended up contacting the Gibraltar small claims court and enquiring about a hearing. In the right circumstances, non attendance would be possible although I would have attended anyway. They did emphasise about using the Gibraltar regulator first.
I submitted a complaint to the Gibraltar regulator who at first wouldn't pursue it because I hadn't 'exhausted' ladbrokes' complaints procedure. Of course it's impossible to do this if ladbrokes refuse to reply to my emails, letters etc. in the end, the regulator emailed senior management there and I was told they would contact me. Two weeks went by and of course no replies to emails again. I followed it up with the regulator again and was paid 24 hours later.
In this case the reason they paid was pressure from the regulator in my opinion.
It's all over for me now (apart from a subject access request under the DPA I have pending with them) thankfully. I'll also want to be refunded postage costs for all the letters I sent them.
Ladbrokes really are the lowest of the low in my opinion. Complete scum.

They even ignored the GRA!!!!

They probably had to pay because the GRA were not impressed that they had deliberately blocked you from using the internal complaints procedures, and still did so despite the GRA emailing senior management.

I am not convinced a PAB would have worked anyway, as if they were determined enough to ignore emails from the GRA, they would probably ignore PABs from Max.

The daft thing is, they could have won, assuming the GRA supported the terms they had used.

This is made even worse given that this is a high street name, not some little known offshore operation.

It may not be worth going for the postage refunds other than via email, otherwise you are just sending good money after bad. The DPA however, should be pursued. They cannot ignore this as they have the emails and the GRA, else they will be in even bigger trouble.

So, what exactly was the term they used, and why? (out of interest).

 

[maxd]

... they would probably ignore PABs from Max.

Their responses have been pretty intermittent of late, not up to par at all.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Their responses have been pretty intermittent of late, not up to par at all.

As a customer, my main gripe was their poor CS, often failing to respond to emails, or if they did, appearing not to answer the questions posed, but any old question they felt like answering.

Every time a problem needed sorting, they would tell me "this is outsourced, we have been unable to obtain a response from our partners who deal with this promotion".

The nail in the coffin for me was there rejection of Neteller as a deposit method they trusted. They had the view that ALL players who used Neteller were "up to no good", so they were blanket banned from taking part in any of the promotions. If that wasn't bad enough, they dumped MGS for Playtech.

It seems that years later things are even worse. An operator must be either incompetent or incredibly arrogant if they feel it's OK to ignore their own regulatory body, well known for being on the side of the casino and more than likely to give a ruling in the casino's favour.

 

[mimi26]

Closed my account there 3 weeks ago and wont be returning!! the CS is disgraceful. They have people on live chat who have not got a clue about how bonuses work, such a shame was once a great casino

 

[huwa]

They even ignored the GRA!!!!

They probably had to pay because the GRA were not impressed that they had deliberately blocked you from using the internal complaints procedures, and still did so despite the GRA emailing senior management.

I am not convinced a PAB would have worked anyway, as if they were determined enough to ignore emails from the GRA, they would probably ignore PABs from Max.

The daft thing is, they could have won, assuming the GRA supported the terms they had used.

This is made even worse given that this is a high street name, not some little known offshore operation.

It may not be worth going for the postage refunds other than via email, otherwise you are just sending good money after bad. The DPA however, should be pursued. They cannot ignore this as they have the emails and the GRA, else they will be in even bigger trouble.

So, what exactly was the term they used, and why? (out of interest).

They are a law unto themselves. The arrogance they show is unbelievable. I still cannot believe Ladbrokes (a high street name as you say) actually tried to steal almost £5,000 from me and fob me off hoping I would just forget about it.

I bet over £30,000 in June this year on the WC and tennis at Ladbrokes. I have used their exchange many times too but it's a joke - they haven't quite figured out that they have already closed the accounts of everyone who might find the exchange useful Anyway, I withdrew at the end of June and deposited £5000 again for the Wimbledon final, tried to place a £5k bet and was offered a paltry amount ~ £200 or whatever it was. I took this as it was better than nothing and tried some live bets after the first set but they wouldn't take a penny. Anyway, I requested a withdrawal as if they don't have the balls to take bigger bets than £200 from me on the Wimbledon final, I'll find a book that does. This was what apparently led to them thinking they could steal £4800 from me. The term they tried to rely on was:

8.3. Your account should not be used as a banking facility and deposits should only be made with a view to using funds to place bets. Should you make repeated deposits and withdrawals without commensurate bets being placed, we reserve the right to pass on to your accounts, without prior notice, any bank charges we have incurred before closing the account.

No discussion. No email. No response on Live Chat. Early August, I had a reply to my letter stating the above. Now, it is clear that a) I was not using my account as a banking facility and b) I made my deposit with a view to making a bet - because errr I did make a bet and had placed £30,000 of bets in the previous month. Furthermore, they couldn't have possibly incurred £4800 of fees on a £5k deposit...so I was left a bit confused. Especially with their reluctance to even discuss this with me. I genuinely believe they hoped I would just forget about the money and move on.

I have emailed my request to be reimbursed for postage etc although you might be able to tell by now that the costs wouldn't put me off pursuing them further. It is personal now. They have also told me they will be complying with my SAR.

 

[huwa]

One more thing - I have to admit that I didn't have much faith at all in the GRA. They surprised me though and I probably wouldn't have been paid (without court action) without them.

 

[jetset]

I'm glad you (eventually) prevailed; Ladbrokes policy of not communicating certainly backfired when they neglected to comply with the GRA order to contact you, and it's good to see even a player-unfriendly outfit like the GRA getting off its butt to make things happen (ultimately).

Ladbrokes' reputation certainly seems to have declined, and this sort of unprofessional behaviour underlines why.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I'm glad you (eventually) prevailed; Ladbrokes policy of not communicating certainly backfired when they neglected to comply with the GRA order to contact you, and it's good to see even a player-unfriendly outfit like the GRA getting off its butt to make things happen (ultimately).

Ladbrokes' reputation certainly seems to have declined, and this sort of unprofessional behaviour underlines why.

Their reasoning just makes things even worse for them. They cut off a high roller's ability to place bets, and then they accuse them of depositing without the intention of making bets. This was not even a dispute over the validity of play, but a straight forward attempt to confiscate the whole of a £5K deposit.

A big name like Ladbrokes should really be able to handle this kind of action. A bloke stood on a wooden crate with a blackboard and chalk at the racecourse can even handle this level of action

I always thought exchanges took the risk away from the operator, and that the prices would be determined by trading between punters and layers. Maybe they just don't want high rollers on the exchanges as they can dominate and distort the market, but in this case why not set limits from the start so that high rollers know that if they want to bet high, they go elsewhere.

This would have been a certain court victory for the OP. The best Ladbrokes could do would be to prove that they incurred extra costs due to the OP. They would still not be able to claim an arbitrary £4800, but would be allowed to deduct actual costs from the settlement. However, as they had blocked the customer from placing bets with the money deposited, they would probably not even get these costs, as they had caused them by deciding to no longer provide the service to the customer.