Has Small Claims Court set Legal Precedent, betting arbitration obsolete?

William Hill have opened Pandora's Box

Cyril's Betting Advice
Cyril's Betting Advice

A punter had a bet with William Hill that Roger federer would win a set 6 – 3 and the bet was layed at 1,000 to 1. Obviously a mistake but the punter either didn’t notice, ( which I don’t buy), or thought he’d chance his arm, so to speak. The bet was a winner but the shop manager refused to pay at the odds on the slip, claiming a palpable error. The punter refused to accept the offered payment.
Now it’s unclear whether the dispute went to arbitration or not. If it had I am 100 % sure what the outcome would have been. It would have ruled in favour of William Hill. As have untold other such cases down the years.

However this punter took his case to the Small Claims Court. The Registrar ruled in his favour. He received over £1,800. There wasn’t a break-down of this figure. Now the big question. Has this set a Legal Precedent? Until more details of the claim are forthcoming it’s leaving things in kind of limbo. It will open the door for any punter to make absurd claims, and legitimate ones too. It’s not even clear whether Hills contested the case. How many future claims, which should be settled by arbitration, will now find their way to the County Courts?
It could lead to utter chaos. Take events where different companies have differing rules for say a match abandoned at half-time. One punter may well receive his expected pay out whilst his nextdoor neighbour, who had the same bet with a different layer, would only receive his stake back.
Could this lead to ALL layers having to adher to exactly the same operating rules? The mind boggles.

Don’t forget. Bet only with SPARE CASH.


Visit Bet365