Bet365 has been publicly shamed in UK newspaper that is national Guardian for allegedly withholding £54,000 ($72,000) of one customer’s funds. The bettor, whose identity is proven to but maybe not revealed by the newspaper, claims that she has been denied duplicated withdrawal requests over a period of months and her only recourse is to simply take legal action.

Based on The Guardian, the bettor signed up for an account at Bet365 in mid-April, depositing £30,000 (£40,000) and promptly losing £23,000 ($30,600) on a number of horseracing bets the next day. Bet365 emailed her within hours to inform her that her optimum stake had increased.

But the overnight she hit an upswing, spinning up the £7,000 she had left into £54,000. She was swiftly informed by the operator via e-mail that her betting restriction was indeed decreased to £1 per bet, which Bet365 described as a ‘trading decision,’ claimed the Guardian. She was, but, told if she wished that she could wager much higher on casino games.

Nonplussed, the woman requested her cash become utilized in her debit card, a procedure that Bet365′s terms and conditions stipulate should simply take between three and five days that are working.

Despite receiving notification that her identity had been fully verified, the customer has been waiting over two months for her money.

What’s Going On?

Cases of online bookmakers restricting the records of players that fit that the mold of being a ‘profitable’ professional sports bettor, are well-known, but without having any details about the woman’s identity it’s hard to find out just what’s going on here, or whether she actually is one.

As being a gambling that is UK-licensed, Bet365 must abide by a robust set of laws handed down by the UK Gambling Commission, which include fraud checks and anti-money-laundering measures, and these usually takes a while to iron out if the system has triggered an anomaly, which may seem to function as situation.

If she had simply been defined as an ‘unprofitable’ customer, through the bookmaker’s point of view, that will give an explanation for limitation on stakes, but perhaps not the withdrawal hold-up.

The woman claims that her bank manager has assured her there is absolutely no concern about the foundation of her funds, which, would fundamentally rule out fraud or money-laundering.

Which actually leaves match-fixing.

Guardian Tight-lipped

The fact that Bet365 refused to comment on the problem shows that there is more to this than meets the eye; because normally the public relations department would jump at the opportunity to chat to the Guardian and grab some free publicity at the same time, so we’ve known a few.

Whether knowingly or perhaps not, the woman might have bet on races of that your results have already been flagged as suspicious. The Guardian assures us that there is ‘no dispute about the credibility of her bets that are winning’ but we’re not sure what’s left throw at her here. As well as the article’s refusal to write any details of the correspondence between the 2 parties, or get into much depth at all in regards to the full instance, does not help our plight.

The Guardian is broadly against the gambling industry in the UK and rails in its article up against the ‘verification’ procedures that may endure withdrawal for customers. But does it not realize that the online gambling industry is certainly one associated with most heavily regulated sectors in the UK? Would it choose to have no verification procedures at all?

No doubt the girl will get her cash, we should probably all just relax a bit if it she gets the all-clear, and in the meantime.