A situation occurred today in my locality, I have some guys working for me today and suddenly I hard them battling with an issues and when I get close to them to know what exactly the problem is, and I asked the guy who look strange to me since I am meeting him for the first time and not a worker on the site what his business and why he is distracting the workers from work.
Then the guy narrated his case to be and he said, that one of the workers came to his betting shop the yesterday to play some visual, that at first the guy came with ₦1,000 in my local currency to make the bets and along the line, he existed the balance but as a regular customer, the agent decided to allow him at further on credits and in all he accumulated a total debt of ₦8,000 because he lost all the bets and since that yesterday he has been on the run from the gambling agent until he traced him to the site today.
So when I wanted to judge the case and possible settlement, I query the casino agent how can you allow a customer to gamble on credit to the tune of 8k Knowing fully well that the gambler only has a 1k balance which already existed?
Also what is the probability that the gambler will ever return after owning such debt in the betting shops, note the gambler's daily pay is 2k as a helper on the site, so he has to work for 4 days to be able to meet that debt that is if he doesn't make any other expenses.
Question is:
What is the possibility of the betting agent getting his money soon/considering the gambler's low-income earnings?
They are both at fault here, but in two different ways. First, the gambler is at fault because he made a deal/contract to pay back the funds that he gambled. It doesn't matter whether he won or lost, he owed those funds to the casino manager/store owner, plain and simple.
Now the store owner/gambling boss made a poor decision allowing the guy to take out credit that he knew he'd probably have a hard time giving back to him if he didn't win his bets. That's just dumb on his part to loan out the money.
But the gambler is 100% at fault here.