Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
A multi-millionaire “problematic gambler” who blown around £ 1.5 million at the stake of football, sue Betfare For him Wealth In a historical case, it was under a duty claiming that to save him from himself.
By-to-Le Property Tycoon Lee Gibson told a court that he had made more than 30,000 individual bets through the betting exchange Betfare during “Vipul”. Gambling Periods between 2009 and 2019.
Although he said that initially he found it “exciting and exciting”, his loss was “unstable” and in March 2019, his account was suspended forever.
47 year old Mr. Gibson LeedsThe world’s largest betting exchange was sued the betfare, alleging that he should have known that he was a “problematic gambler” and it was his duty to stop it as soon as possible.
The case was rejected by one High court The judges were last year, but his bid for a compensation of about £ 1 million will now be heard by three top judges in the Appeal Court this week.
The lawyers say that the matter can have a major impact on the online betting industry as it will make it clear what duties the online betting companies have to perform towards the gamblers.
His barrister, Yash Kulkarni KC, stated that Mr. Gibson’s betting was focused on the complicated “right score” football markets, sometimes in “unclear” games and up to £ 20,000.
He said that the judge should have ascertained that the betfare should “know or know” that Mr. Gibson was a “problematic gambler” and, because he treated him as a VIP with his personal “relationship manager”, assuming the duty of proper care to him.
“The evidence revealed that the betfare knew or had such information available to him showing that Mr. Gibson was chasing his deficit, borrowed money to gamble or sold something, and was gambling beyond the level he could bear his income after tax and expenditure,” he said.
The court heard that Mr. Gibson had made himself a millionaire by purchasing and renewing property in Leeds region despite leaving school at the age of 16.
At its highest level, their portfolio consisted of 16 houses, which were rented to students, but later some were sold or mortgaged due to losses.
He began gambling using the betfare exchange in 2009 – mostly on football and, although he had many credits several times, by the end of 2012, he had lost £ 100,000.
By the end of 2015, his deficit was £ 500,000, £ 1m by January 2018 and in March 2019 when his account was suspended by Betfare, it was approximately £ 1.5m.
He was considered as a VIP customer, offering encourages such as hospitals in football matches and golf invitations, although incentives over time were reduced.
When Mr. Gibson was questioned under anti -money laundering rules about the source of his gambling funds, he told the betfare that he was a landlord who had a large portfolio of properties.
Betfare finally removed Mr. Gibson as a customer in 2019, but he sued, claiming that he had “knew or knowing his problem” and he should have stopped soon.
His lawyers claimed that by behaving with an individual manager as a VIP customer, the company also took responsibility to take care of him, which she failed to fulfill.
He claimed compensation for the amount lost during gambling in six years before filing his court claim in 2021, which was about 1 million pounds in total.
At the end of the case hearing last year, Judge Nigel Bird said he was not sure that the betfare should have known about his gambling problem, as he tried to hide it himself.
He said, “Mr. Gibson assured the constant and often betfare that he was able to finance his gambling, including his disadvantages, and offer any information provided by him to the betfare,” he presents a different picture, “he said.
“The fact is that he has consistently satisfied anti -money laundering investigations, making it impossible for Mr. Gibson to argue that his deficit size was sufficient to create proper concerns.
“In fact, even after the trial, there is no real suggestion that Mr. Gibson could not bear the expenses of his gambling.
“At least according to the information given to the betfare, he could raise money for his gambling, he misled the betfare about his gambling and it is very difficult to identify a problematic gambler that is not honest.
“In my view, Mr. Gibson did not fail to share information about his gambling problem, he actively stepped into hiding it and especially to present a completely incorrect picture in front of the world and especially in front of betfare.”
But in the appeal court, Mr. Kulkarni argued that there was a mistake in the conclusion of the judge about the knowledge of the betfare about Mr. Gibson’s gambling problem.
He said, “The judge should have found out whether the betfare knew or should have been known that Mr. Gibson claims was likely to be a problematic gambler during the physical time and otherwise his discovery was clearly wrong.”
He further said, “Mr. Gibson made at least 20,000 individual bets in six years before 22 January 2021, which is more than five per day.”
“The judge should have ascertained that where a person openly gambles despite facing heavy losses, and uses money that appears to be at least partly the possibility of selling his business property or borrowing money against them, the person is likely to be a problematic gambler.”
He said that the judge failed to find out that it was a minimum requirement for the license of the betfare to “refuse to serve a customer who is likely to be problematic gamblers based on all the relevant sources of information.”
The judge also believed that, while allotting him a VIP relationship manager, Betfare “did not take the responsibility of taking proper care to save Mr. Gibson from financial loss.”
He argued, “Betfare took the responsibility of taking proper care that he should not suffer financial loss due to his gambling gambling facility.”
“The judge should have assumed that since Mr. Gibson was appointed as a VIP relationship manager, whose role was to interact with him to maintain or increase his betting, he knew that he was likely to be a problem, and took advantage of his betting habits to increase the bonuses and the opposite to motivate the betting was appropriate. It was taken responsibility for taking care that he should not suffer financial loss due to the problem of gambler due to his gambling facility. “
Betfare – Listed as TSE Malta LP in the claim – three top judges, High Court Chancellor Sir Julian Flox, Lord Justice Popalwell and Lord Justice Birs are opposing the appeal application.
Its lawyers are arguing that the judge bird’s decision was correct and the appeal is urging the court to maintain it.
It is expected that the decision will be reserved till the later date.