Betfair appeal case could disrupt online gambling after £1.5 million losses

Lee Gibson, a multimillionaire “problem gambler” who lost almost £1.5 million ($2 million) on soccer bets, is trying to overturn a High Court ruling after pursuing Betfair for allowing him to gamble, in a landmark case that could change online betting as we know it.

Gibson claims that the betting platform had a duty to protect him from himself, as they were aware of the gambling-related harm he was suffering.

Flutter Entertainment is the parent company of Betfair, with other brands such as Paddy Power and FanDuel in its stable. The former was named as the official NFL sportsbook partner in the UK and Ireland last month.

The 47-year-old buy-to-let property tycoon had placed more than 30,000 individual bets with Betfair between 2009 and 2019.

Tycoon attempts to appeal court decision on Betfair

Gibson is now aiming to reclaim around £1,000,000, with the case having potential consequences for what duties betting firms are required to provide to customers.

Last year in the UK High Court, Judge Nigel Bird rejected the case, but the appeal will now be heard this week.

Judge Bird was not convinced that Betfair should have known about Gibson’s gambling problem, as he tried to conceal it.

“Mr Gibson consistently and often reassured Betfair that he was able to fund his gambling, including his losses, and none of the information he provided to Betfair painted a different picture,” said the Justice.

“The fact that he consistently satisfied anti-money laundering checks makes it impossible for Mr Gibson to argue that the size of his losses was, of itself, enough to raise reasonable concerns.

“Indeed, even after the trial, there is no real suggestion that Mr Gibson could not afford his gambling.”

Gibson was a VIP customer with a dedicated Betfair ‘relationship manager’

However, this was dismissed by Yash Kulkarni KC, Mr Gibson’s barrister, who stated in the appeal case: “The judge ought to have found that Betfair knew or ought to have known that Mr Gibson was likely to be a problem gambler throughout the material time of the claim and his finding otherwise was plainly wrong.

He continued, “Mr Gibson placed at least 20,000 individual bets in the six years prior to 22 January 2021, which is more than five per day.”

“The judge ought to have gone on to find that where a person appears likely to be gambling prolifically despite facing heavy losses, using money which appears likely to be at least in part from selling his business assets or loaning money against them, that person is likely to be a problem gambler.”

Another facet of the case is that Betfair treated Gibson as a VIP customer with a dedicated ‘relationship manager’.

Kulkarni asserts that because of this, the firm had a duty of care to look after him properly.

The bettor’s activity was said to be focused on the Correct Score soccer market, often in “obscure games” with amounts of up to £20,000 ($26,745) staked.

“The evidence showed that Betfair knew or had information available to them showing that Mr Gibson was chasing his losses, had borrowed money or sold something to gamble, and was gambling at a level beyond that which he could afford from his income after tax and expenses,” added Kulkarni.

Gibson has made his fortune by buying and renovating properties in the city of Leeds, in the north of England.

He began his relationship with the platform in 2009, using the Betfair Exchange, and had accrued losses of £100,000 within three years, despite his account being in credit at times.

By 2015, the losses had increased to £500,000 and then reached £1m by the start of 2018.

By the time Betfair permanently suspended his account in March 2019, the arrears had almost increased to £1.5m.

Betfair is arguing for the Court of Appeal to uphold the initial ruling, represented by Jonathan Davies-Jones KC.

“In light of the repeated assurances from Mr Gibson that he was both wealthy and in control of his gambling, and the contemporaneous documents that Mr Gibson provided to Betfair, the factual premise of the alleged duty of care – that Betfair had actual or constructive knowledge of Mr Gibson’s gambling problem – failed.”

A final judgment is expected to follow at a later date.

Featured image: Flickr, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The post Betfair appeal case could disrupt online gambling after £1.5 million losses appeared first on ReadWrite.