Betfair NT Commission Penalty - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK   harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Betfair NT Commission Penalty - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Betfair NT Commission Penalty  (Read 667 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15210
O.P. « 2018-Nov-13, 04:10 PM »


'Turning point': Betfair ordered to repay 'red-flag' gambler $150,000

Nick Toscano

By Nick Toscano
12 November 2018 — 11:49am

Online gambling site Betfair Australia has been ordered to repay $150,000 to a problem gambler after failing to identify his “red-flag” betting behaviour, in what is considered a landmark verdict regarding the responsibilities of digital gambling providers.

The complainant, a heavy-spending customer, in February this year requested that Betfair cash out $150,000 from his Betfair account and deposit it into his bank account. But a few hours later, and in a “desperate mindset” after losing a total of $190,000 in a short period of time, the gambler requested that Betfair reverse the transaction and put the money back into his betting account.



Australia's only online betting exchange, Betfair, is owned by ASX-listed Crown Resorts.

Australia's only online betting exchange, Betfair, is owned by ASX-listed Crown Resorts.Credit:Pat Scala

After a series of phone calls, Betfair agreed to approve a reversal of $145,000 as a “one-off”, which the punter proceeded to gamble and lose on bets placed through Betfair that same day. Betfair left $5000 in his bank account, which he gambled and lost the following day.

Owned by James Packer’s casino giant Crown Resorts, Betfair Australia is said to have about 20,000 active monthly customers. It operates like a stock exchange, by facilitating gamblers with opposing views about the outcome of a horse race or sport event to bet against each other.






The gambler, who is not identified in legal documents, took his case against Betfair to its regulator in the Northern Territory – the jurisdiction where most of the nation’s online gambling companies hold their operating licences.


Related Article



Gary went on a 13-hour gambling binge. By the time his family raised the alarm, it was too late

Gambling

Gary went on a 13-hour gambling binge. By the time his family raised the alarm, it was too late
Add to shortlist
Delivering its decision, the NT racing commission said it had considered the key question of whether Betfair should have identified certain “red-flag behaviours” that indicated the customer was a potential problem gambler. Such red-flag behaviours, according to the commission, include gambling for extended periods of time, changes in betting patterns, increases in deposit frequency and increases in sums of money deposited.

The commission noted that Betfair was aware that the gambler had, on two occasions, self-excluded himself temporarily from using the site.

He had also substantially increased his deposits over the two months immediately prior to the situation, the commission found. In 2016, his deposits came to $22,000, and in 2017, they were $47,000. But in the first two months of 2018, he deposited $380,000, the commission found.



“There is evidence that Betfair should have reasonably seen some red-flag behaviours,” the commission said. “It is reasonable in the circumstances, and particularly given full knowledge of the complainant’s previous self-exclusions and time-outs from his account, that a review of all his betting activity up to the time of the request to cancel the withdrawal to be carried out.”


Related Article



Rollout of 'urgent' online gambling self-exclusion scheme faces delay

Gaming & wagering

Rollout of 'urgent' online gambling self-exclusion scheme faces delay
Add to shortlist
If this had been done, the commission said, it would have been apparent that he had lost more than $190,000 in a single day prior to his request to cancel the transaction.

Gambling-reform campaigners and online wagering industry insiders said the commission’s decision was among the toughest handed down against a digital gambling company in Australia.

“This case is a turning point,” said Lauren Levin, the policy director of Financial Counselling Australia. “It will send a signal to the online gambling industry that it cannot ignore its obligations to stop accepting bets from people who are obviously red-flagged.



“Financial counsellors see gambling harm regularly. We see families destroyed. We see suicides.”


Related Article



'Three months, half a million bucks': Paying the price for a punt

Gaming & wagering

'Three months, half a million bucks': Paying the price for a punt
Add to shortlist
The commission’s decision comes amid moves by state and federal governments to roll out new standards across the online gambling industry, and amid calls by campaigners for tougher and more enforceable requirements for betting sites to make checks on big-spenders, monitor their deposits and make sure they are safe.

A spokesman for Betfair would not comment on the decision, and would not say whether the company was considering launching an appeal of the commission’s orders.

Betfair, during the hearing, argued that it could not have reasonably known that the customer had a gambling problem. He had never stated that he had a problem, and there were no “discernible indicators of problem gambling found in [his] activity”, the company said.



Betfair said a customer’s request to reverse a withdrawal was not considered an indicator of problem gambling. The company said it generally did not agree to such requests, but it made an exception in this case due to his “longstanding loyalty” to the company.

The commission said it was the third time in 18 months that Betfair had been found to have breached a condition of its licence.

In addition to the $150,00 refund, the commission fined Betfair $13,175.

Ms Levin said the fine was inadquate and demonstrated the need for greater penalty powers.

“Any other financial regulator in Australia would get laughed at with such an insipid fine,” she said.

“If the NT Racing Commission doesn’t have the right regulatory powers, the government needs to give it the powers.”

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/companies/turning-point-betfair-ordered-to-repay-red-flag-gambler-150k-20181112-p50ffu.html

ENDS

This would be a first as far as I know.. there was the Bill Waterhouse case with the banker who used an assumed name ........lost millions of other peoples money and more recently but some years ago another unsuccessful punter tried it on with the casino  Harry Kakavas but didn't win......that's why betting ....punting is called gambling.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/casino-did-not-exploit-man-who-spent-1-5b-rules-high-court-20130605-2npe5.html


Giddy Up :beer:

« Last Edit: 2018-Nov-13, 04:49 PM by Arsenal »

Offline bascoe

  • Open
  • User 2568
  • Posts: 122
« 2018-Nov-15, 10:33 AM Reply #1 »
Peter Huxley - he went to gaol - the BF deeds sound a lot more unconscionable-


Sent from my iPhone using Racehorse Talk

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15210
« 2018-Nov-15, 06:17 PM Reply #2 »
Peter Huxley - he went to gaol - the BF deeds sound a lot more unconscionable-


Sent from my iPhone using Racehorse Talk

That's it Huxley


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap