Teenager takes bet365 to court over £1m ‘won’ on horse races
Bookmaker refuses to pay out to student amid fraud and cheating claim
A STUDENT is suing one of Britain’s biggest bookmakers for refusing to pay out £1million on a winning bet on the horses.
Megan McCann, who was just 19 when she placed the bet, has lodged a writ in the High Court in Northern Ireland against Hillside (UK Sports) LP, the company which operates bet365, an online betting company.
Miss McCann, who lives near Belfast, claims that she is owed £1,009,960 by bet365. She staked almost £25,000 on 12 different horses in four relatively obscure races, winning £985,000. But the betting company has declined to honour the wager.
It has insisted that Miss McCann is in “flagrant breach” of its own terms and conditions because the firm is convinced the original betting stake was supplied by a “third party”.
In letters from bet365’s lawyers, Miss McCann found herself accused of fraud and cheating. She is understood to vehemently deny any wrongdoing.
The successful wager involved a total of 960 £13 each way “Lucky 15” bets placed on 12 horses running in the 6.10 at Bath, the 7.20 at Kempton, and the 7.00 and 8.30 at Naas in Ireland on June 22 last year. “Lucky 15” bets allow a combination of accumulated winnings.
But rather than pay up, bet365 has withheld the sum as well as Miss McCann’s initial stake of £24,960.
Exasperated, Miss McCann called in lawyers who issued a writ in May in the High Court in Belfast. The writ, seen by The Sunday Tel
egraph, accuses bet365 and its Gibraltar-based parent company of breach of contract and demands damages of £1,009,960. A day after her “win”, Miss McCann contacted bet365 to withdraw her money.
From documents seen by this newspaper, it is understood that a bet365 representative, via the website’s “live chat”, congratulated her and confirmed the request.
The following day, she received a phone call from another staff member who asked a number of questions including: “What is your star sign?” After answering all queries with regards to the bet and her identity apparently satisfactorily confirmed by the agent, Miss McCann was advised that the money would be processed within 48 hours.
The money never materialised. Instead Miss McCann’s account was suspended, and then closed.
At the heart of bet365’s refusal to pay is the betting firm’s insistence that Miss McCann breached a “no third party” rule, which insists the whole stake must be put up by the customer alone.
Miss McCann’s lawyers dispute that she agreed to such a rule, which is buried in terms and conditions that are “too lengthy, too complex and much too vague for the average customer to un- derstand”. Such a rule might also effectively prevent syndicates from betting.
Her lawyers contend that the wording of such a “no third party rule” clause effectively means that “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’.”
The case brought by Miss McCann could have profound implications for all customers betting online. In one legal letter, seen by The
Sunday Telegraph, her lawyers wrote: “Our client’s case is very straight forward. She placed a bet with your client. She won. She is entitled to her winnings.”
A spokesman for bet365 said: “A full investigation has been carried out into the circumstances of the bet that was placed. bet365 is entirely satisfied the circumstances are such that winnings are not payable in relation to it. We expect this position to be upheld at trial.
“We are not prepared to comment further whilst litigation is ongoing.”
‘She placed a bet with your client. She won. She is entitled to her winnings’