Bet365 court case may have severe implications for operators2017-07-17 14:07:27
Megan McCann, a student from County Down, Northern Ireland placed an unusually high number of bets on 12 horse races across four different races on Bet365 in June 2016. The student won £985,000 plus her initial bet back and is now suing Bet365 as the company is refusing to pay out the sum. According to newspaper reports, McCann placed 960 £13 each way bets on 12 horses, racing at Bath, Kempton and Naas in Ireland, on 22 June 2016. A year on, it is still not clear whether or not the student will be entitled to her winnings.
Bet365 suspects fraud
McCann placed so-called "lucky 15" bets via Bet365. This type of bet forms a special accumulator and requires the pundit to make four selection. McCann selected her four horses for each "lucky 15" bet, and this resulted in the staggering win, given that many of her selections came in. Bet365 reportedly told her that the money would be processed within 48 hours. Next, though, her account was closed as Bet365 had ruled that McCann's bet was fraudulent and accused her of cheating.
McCann responds to accusations
McCann denies the accusations and has now filed a law suit against Bet365. A document written by McCann's legal team to Bet365 states that "our client's case is very straightforward. She placed a bet with your client. She won. She is entitled to her winnings." McCann is seeking £1million for breach of contract from Bet365.
In reality, the circumstances are less clear cut than McCann's legal team makes them out to be. While the circumstances surrounding McCann placing numerous bets on the aforementioned races are not entirely clear, it has been alleged that McCann did not supply the £25,000 stake herself.
Bet365 states in its terms and conditions that stakes cannot be supplied by third-parties. McCann's lawyers argue that the student did not agree to this, as terms and conditions that are "too lengthy, too complex and much too vague for the average customer to understand." In short, the McCann legal team believes that this term was buried within a large list of rules.
McCann case could have massive implications for online gambling
Whether or not McCann should be paid her winnings is debatable. However, upon examining an exchange between the McCann-side and Bet365 it becomes clear that this case could change online gambling. The McCann lawyers argue that the Bet365 rule is unreasonable. The McCann lawyers noted that if the "third party rule" was taken serious at all times, “the husband who puts a bet on the winner of X-factor for his wife, or on the winner of the Grand National, would have those winnings ‘robbed’ of him.”
Regardless of the outcome, gambling operators are likely to make changes to the wording of their terms and conditions that addresses this particular rule.
"This is wrong. It is a case in which your client has been operating the account... using the funds of and for the benefit of third parties, in flagrant breach of our client’s terms," stated the Bet365 representatives.