A Gambling Operator Court Case

[Gozie51]

He accuses the operator of failing to stop him, which led to a substantial loss.

This is a funny thing that happens in betting arena but to be serious it is not the fault of the operator that he lost so much money. Well if he has gone on to the court, I think what he is likely to be looking at is:

1. The terms and conditions if there is account limit or limitation that will stop the player from playing if he has gotten to a certain number of games played or duration.

2. Manipulation, this is in the case the first point was proved that there account limitation so it will become an onus to prove that the operator manipulated his account to deactivate the limit order so that he will continue playing. Other than these area of manipulation of account limit, I don't see how a gambler that have chosen to try his luck to double his money would turn back to cause trouble after loosing his money by himself.

[n0ne]

If the Operator needs to stop the gambler, then how could things work for the operators. Maybe that particular website might've got set its own terms of service. Gambling is pure business for its owners, so they never intend to stop a gambler in between his wagering activities.

If someone stops a gambler citing his limits were crossed, who gonna use the same platform again. What if a gambler is on his winning streak and suddenly the casino operator requests to stop wagering. What will happen, this is completely unacceptable by the gamblers. Anyhow it is every gamblers responsibility to understand the platform's terms of service and start using it.

[TimeTeller]

If the Operator needs to stop the gambler, then how could things work for the operators. Maybe that particular website might've got set its own terms of service. Gambling is pure business for its owners, so they never intend to stop a gambler in between his wagering activities.

If someone stops a gambler citing his limits were crossed, who gonna use the same platform again. What if a gambler is on his winning streak and suddenly the casino operator requests to stop wagering. What will happen, this is completely unacceptable by the gamblers. Anyhow it is every gamblers responsibility to understand the platform's terms of service and start using it.

I don't understand why some gamblers expect that they will be stopped by the casino owners about their gambling activities?
That is true, it is business. So as much as possible they want their players to play or bet as long as they want.
Also, there is reason why they put the disclaimer about Responsible Gambling. Because it is your own choice why you are playing in the first place.
Actually, there's no maximum bets that I have seen in all casinos or bookies that you can make.
So they won't stop you from playing. Unless, they have self-exclusion feature and you signed up for that.
But with what the OP presented, the gambling operator can easily win such case. Gamblers should read the terms of the casino.

[Casdinyard]

Why didn't he stop himself?

If he wins the legal case, there really is a need for casinos to check the backgrounds of their users before they reach this point. Any user could just purposely hit their maximum and take legal action to make money in court and not in the casino. That's the way to make money not win on a poker table.

Agreed. Not victim blaming here but for me, the sole responsibility of ensuring that you're not addicted to anything, gambling especially, is that you know how to assume control of your urges and yourself. If you can't control your gambling habits no matter how much block or limit casinos impose upon you when you reach a certain threshold, you'll find other ways to gamble just to get that fix. You're not gonna stop until your whole bankroll's swiped. That's why I advocate for control, and ensuring that you don't fall off the deep end when you gamble. It's a pretty simple concept.

Besides the background checking of users, I think (and this is for this particular gambler only) there needs to be intervention in the form of a therapy or something to stop and whet off any addiction that this guy has, he's gonna ruin families and his life, I swear.

[STT]

This is a mainstream gamble site that makes a large amount of money in that country.  The lawsuit is hoping its more profitable for the company to give something back from the lost bets then look bad in the context of possible problem gambling, its a fair gambit I guess.   Its not the frequency of bets exactly but the duration in one day and possibly the percentage of wealth that customer had that was gambled.   A normal company wont know how much you have available to gamble but I suppose a very safe gamble operation could be required to run a credit check and operate limits based off that premise.

[coin-investor]

All I know is casinos track cheaters but not all their players' bets as long as it is legit if there is no maximum bets that a player can do that is set by the terms, they can bet all they want, based on the article OP provided about Bet365 getting sued for the maximum bet.

If it does, a new precedent could be set for the gaming industry. In addition to being responsible for consumers’ gaming activity, operators may soon be responsible for limiting how much they can lose. Even if they pass affordability, responsible gambling, and mental health checks, consumers might still be able to lay claim to losses.

So it's worth watching this case if the player won casinos will look into limiting their members' betting and how much they can lose after doing an assessment and that could be bad for many casinos.

[AmoreJaz]

All I know is casinos track cheaters but not all their players' bets as long as it is legit if there is no maximum bets that a player can do that is set by the terms, they can bet all they want, based on the article OP provided about Bet365 getting sued for the maximum bet.

If it does, a new precedent could be set for the gaming industry. In addition to being responsible for consumers’ gaming activity, operators may soon be responsible for limiting how much they can lose. Even if they pass affordability, responsible gambling, and mental health checks, consumers might still be able to lay claim to losses.

So it's worth watching this case if the player won casinos will look into limiting their members' betting and how much they can lose after doing an assessment and that could be bad for many casinos.

do you really think the guy will win this case? we all know, casinos don't limit your betting so long you have money in your account. and never heard a casino or bookie limiting their player's bet, unless they have small bankroll and they can't pay the winnings of the player.
the case was published last year, so don't know the updates on this case. but had he been winning, i don't think he will sue the Entain company. now, he lost a lot of money beyond his monthly take-home, hence, he found a way to sue the casino. fiat-based casinos may have not been strict in implementing their terms but do we really expect them to call their players one by one asking where they are getting their money to gamble on their platform?

[QueenVera]

Well this is another very funny story to me and I see no reason why a casino should be sued for ones intentional losses and I have just one simple question for the player which is, if he had won some very good amount from his betting would  he ask for a refund or be grateful?
I'm sorry the player has to loss such amount of money but the truth be told that taking the casino to court over  this kind of incidence is a total waste of money because I believe  there is a warning not to gamble more than you can loss and people shouldn't  gamble with borrowed money too  and just with this  warnings alone, I believe the case  might be in favour of the casino  

[mv1986]

A gambler made 163 bets in a day and the the casino said it acceptable. Because for some high-rolling gamblers, losing around one-third of a bankroll is considered acceptable.  This gambler is in court. He accuses the operator of failing to stop him, which led to a substantial loss. He said that, "the betting activity didn’t raise any red flags at Bet365, and if it did, it didn’t raise them high enough. It took the operator two months to step in after the massive deposit to verify the source of funds, at which time he was already down £46,907 (US$58,657)."

It should be noted that this is not the first instance of a gambler suing a gaming operator for their losses. In this instance, a gambler claimed that despite having the tools at their disposal, the gambling operator had not done enough to curb his gambling problem. This gambler could spend up to €21,135 (US$21,135) per day and, ultimately, lost €271,234 (US$271,234) in seven months.

What is the maximum number of bets that one can place per day, and do casinos have a system in place to identify any unusual spikes in a user's daily betting activity? Would it be regarded as a component of the casino's responsible gambling policy or as interfering in someone else's affairs it they lock the  gambler's account?

- https://www.casino.org/news/bet365-rejects-claim-162-bets-in-a-day-may-be-a-sign-of-a-gambling-problem/
- https://www.casino.org/news/man-making-3000-a-month-sues-entain-for-letting-him-gamble-over-2m/

I doubt that the gambler has any chance to be successful at court. Theoretically you could extend this case to any addiction or problematic behavior. If I go into a bar and drink two bottles of Whiskey, then get into my car and crash it into a wall, I can't go to court and sue the bar owner. Unless I explicitly let him know in advance that I am an alcoholic and I am going to drive home my car. But even then it usually would at maximum mean that this only touches upon criminal law and the bar owner might get a penalty, but he would certainly not be liable for any financial damage I personally incurred due to crashing my car into the wall.

I don't even know what the responsibility of the casino would be when a gambler sends an email stating that he has a gambling addiction, the casino doesn't block the account and the gambler loses 10,000 USD. Would the casino then be liable? It is an interesting legal question, but I am convinced that this is usually not going well for the plaintiff.

Passing some laws is also difficult because every case is different. As it has been said here if someone is a multi millionaire and loses 10k a night, why would anyone really care? But raising the bar so high that a casino has to scrutinize every single individual life situation also doesn't sound very realistic.

This one mentioned by OP is certainly not going to work out for the gambler.

[Negotiation]

We have to be careful when it comes to gambling it would be foolish to court the gambling operator. All forms of gambling are not in the external world. They can't do anything in court for online gambling the name of the gambling sites will be bad. Most of the sites are operated from outside the country. New sites are springing up every day as the demand increases they even have mobile apps most of the controls are from outside the country. Therefore, the site should be carefully considered and practice gambling context.

[flyingcarpet]

What is the maximum number of bets that one can place per day, and do casinos have a system in place to identify any unusual spikes in a user's daily betting activity? Would it be regarded as a component of the casino's responsible gambling policy or as interfering in someone else's affairs it they lock the  gambler's account?

I have not come across such a limit. Usually the limits are about the maximum amount of money. In addition, certain warnings appear in consecutive losses and it is said that you should pay attention. Other than that, I don't know anything about maximum limits. It seems absurd to me that people blame other things for their losses. They must know how to stop themselves when they lose.

[Ondekinecakabilirim]

We always take our own risks in life and win or lose based on our own efforts. It seemed childish to me to blame someone else for an event that was under our own responsibility. If the person who lost his money in gambling was in the opposite situation and he won money, would he complain about the casino? Of course he wouldn't do that. He would thank the casino and walk away. In my opinion, his behavior is unacceptable and funny. He must learn to act like an adult.

[Wexnident]

It's sad, yes, but at the same time dumb as well. Why not blame internet providers for giving access to gambling websites now. Addicts gotta stop victimizing themselves if the underlying cause is themselves and not external parties. I mean said gambler would've probably still done the same thing regardless of what casino down the line.

And I highly doubt casinos would put a limit, even if requested by a user (unless it's a feature of the casino, which is highly unlikely to happen, but will probably be welcomed by addicts). Their a business after all, primary goal is to make profit. Money from your average joe vs money from a gambling addicts are both money anyway.

[judeafante]

People should be responsible for their actions and how they control their vice, it's not the obligation of the casino to check if you are spending what you can afford to lose, especially in a platform like a casino where their business model is to make profit from your bets.
Casinos are profit driven you're looking for entertainment and a chance to make a profit and the casino will give it to you, but if you lose then you should be man enough to accept your losses when you bet you accept the uncertainty of the results, or whatever results it will yield.

[Jawhead999]

We always take our own risks in life and win or lose based on our own efforts. It seemed childish to me to blame someone else for an event that was under our own responsibility. If the person who lost his money in gambling was in the opposite situation and he won money, would he complain about the casino? Of course he wouldn't do that. He would thank the casino and walk away. In my opinion, his behavior is unacceptable and funny. He must learn to act like an adult.

It's always like that, people only like to win and make money, but they can't accept lose, similar like people who invest in Bitcoin and hope their investment would be doubled overnight

People who can't accept lose in slot or luck based games are better to gamble on skill based games e.g. sport because the result is 100% transparent. There's no photoshopped in sport, although there's still a chance of scripted or fixed game.

[Coin_trader]

Believe or Not there’s a real life story that user manage to get a compensation from a casino due to the court ruling in favor of the gambler. If anyone remember the story of Christian Hainz agains a Swiss casino. He loss $3 million in the casino due to his addiction. He accused the casino that they are manipulating him and use his addiction to take advantage on him for not stopping him too early.

The court ruling about the manipulation allegation makes Hainz get a compensation of 500K USD which is not bad to recover some of his loss.

Some court is considerate on cases like gambling addiction. This is the worst nightmare of a casino in an event that the judge is in favor to the victim while they have an incompetent attorney to make their case.

You can read the story number as source for this info: https://greatbridgelinks.com/5-gamblers-who-won-casino-lawsuits/

Why is it that people sue the house after numerous losses? The gambler somehow had a better lawyer than the Swiss casino, unless the Swiss casino wrote on their terms and condition that they'll stop addicts from staking so much money, then the gambler has a better chance over the casino. A gambler that staked 3million dollars at a go, should be cautious of his expenses while gambling. What if he won most of the games and made more profits would he complain that the house didn't stop him? on the other hand, if he spent that amount on night club would he sue the club owner for not stopping him from buying expensive wines? things get tricky when it comes to casino, due to addicts.

Act of desperation I guess. IIRC his case, His company went down and he use the remaining money to gamble and recover his company loses quickly but it turns out that he lose more in the process. He is really in the impression of addiction since he is not in the right mind before he gamble which maybe the case he use to convince the judge.

This is the beauty of the court. Their judgement is always based on facts and evidence but judges have emotion which somehow they empathize the complainant situation to come up with that kind of ruling.

Casino do monitor every players activity especially high roller. I think they knew what’s going on and they just really turn a blind eye because they knew that it’s none of their business but sadly judge doesn’t think that way. 

[Mr. Magkaisa]

     -  I just read of such a situation where a gambler complained to the game operator at the casino simply because he was not prevented from gambling so as not to lead to a large amount of loss.

In fairness, that gambler loses more than 21k$ a day. It means that he is a rich gambler, he throws money in a casino. Isn't it the gambler's responsibility if he knows that his loss is big, he should stop and should not blame the gaming operator. That's why others say that we must gamble responsibly.

[bitbollo]

it's not a simple discussion.
Few more elements....
there was a very specific pattern in his deposits (for example the days on which deposits were made were the same, always, linked directly with salary received).
he received offers to push him to play, likewise promotion/ bonus etc
the site had not provided any kind of assistance even if requested.
In short, it is not such a simple matter... And for sure these events could boost authority to approve new laws.
I always suggest setting maximum limits on the amount It can deposit or bet. for who use cryptocurrencies... use cold wallets that are difficult to access or multisignature wallets!

[inthelongrun]

So how is the case going on? Did the gambler able to beat the betting company in court?

Personally, I doubt the court will reward the decision to the gambler. There's a lot reminder everywhere the importance of responsible gambling. Plus gambling is not illegal and is supposed as an entertainment hubs.

It's like obese people that consumes a lot of food regularly on fast foods and then suing them. Or a cigarette smoker who's suffering from a disease related to smoking addiction, this might have the better chances of winning in the court.

[danherbias07]

A sad story when you are the one running the business.

Imagine people suing McDonald's because they didn't stop them from eating at the same fast food store every day and it got out of hand that they did it twice a day so they get fat.
Imagine a pork store being sued because they didn't stop a man from buying a lot of pork and so he was now feeling high blood pressure and admitted to hospital because he experience a mild stroke.

This is an abuse of their habit and they should not be pointing fingers at who is at fault. It's only the gambler who made a big mistake here and should be blaming himself.
Now, if he can prove that he registered for a "responsible gambling" service then I might agree with him, if not, there's nothing a business should answer about. What a f**ked up world we have if they will be the ones paying for the gamblers' greed.
They only offered a service to gamble with our favorite casino games and sports, it will depend on us on how we will control it.