This is legal absurdity, the judges will be holding their heads listening to this nonsense
In principle, technical errors are also paid, such as instead of the real coefficient 1.01, 101 is written, and 101 is paid. There have been such court decisions and decisions of regulators in the USA and Australia.
similar case
I remember perfectly where I was on June 23, 2017 – I was shopping. I got a bet notification on my smartphone: Federer vs. Khachanov. The minimum winning odds for Federer were 1.26, but 888sport was offering odds of 8.50.
With such a large discrepancy, this was an extremely profitable bet. So I placed a bet of €100. Just as I saw that 888sport accepted my bet, I placed another €100. I tried to place a third bet to complete the €300 I wanted to place, but 888sport left it as “pending approval”.
I was not wrong, a few minutes later my bets showed up as canceled.
It's time to hire a lawyer.
The judges' decision implies the belief that:
1 – The cancellation of the bet was an abuse
2– Risks should be divided between the bookmaker and the bettor
3 – Bookmakers cannot make unilateral decisions regarding the application of their rules
4– If there was an error on the bookmaker's part, it cannot be passed on to the user
Therefore, in short, the plaintiff claims that the defendant cannot refuse to pay out his winning bets by canceling them unilaterally and unreasonably (if there was any mistake on his part, it cannot be transferred to the consumer) and on the basis of such an alleged clause, which is unfair and therefore null and void, as contested by the plaintiff, under the General Commercial Conditions Act (the "rule in question" being that of the accession) and the General Consumer and Consumers Act, and in conclusion asks that the claim be condemned to pay the aforementioned 750 for each bet, together with its legal interests.
https://winnerodds.com/how-i-beat-888sport-in-court-and-got-paid/

This is legal absurdity, the judges will be holding their heads listening to this nonsense
In principle, technical errors are also paid, such as instead of the real coefficient 1.01, 101 is written, and 101 is paid. There have been such court decisions and decisions of regulators in the USA and Australia.
similar case
I remember perfectly where I was on June 23, 2017 – I was shopping. I got a bet notification on my smartphone: Federer vs. Khachanov. The minimum winning odds for Federer were 1.26, but 888sport was offering odds of 8.50.
With such a large discrepancy, this was an extremely profitable bet. So I placed a bet of €100. Just as I saw that 888sport accepted my bet, I placed another €100. I tried to place a third bet to complete the €300 I wanted to place, but 888sport left it as “pending approval”.
I was not wrong, a few minutes later my bets showed up as canceled.
It's time to hire a lawyer.
The judges' decision implies the belief that:
1 – The cancellation of the bet was an abuse
2– Risks should be divided between the bookmaker and the bettor
3 – Bookmakers cannot make unilateral decisions regarding the application of their rules
4– If there was an error on the bookmaker's part, it cannot be passed on to the user
Therefore, in short, the plaintiff claims that the defendant cannot refuse to pay out his winning bets by canceling them unilaterally and unreasonably (if there was any mistake on his part, it cannot be transferred to the consumer) and on the basis of such an alleged clause, which is unfair and therefore null and void, as contested by the plaintiff, under the General Commercial Conditions Act (the "rule in question" being that of the accession) and the General Consumer and Consumers Act, and in conclusion asks that the claim be condemned to pay the aforementioned 750 for each bet, together with its legal interests.
https://winnerodds.com/how-i-beat-888sport-in-court-and-got-paid/

This is legal absurdity, the judges will be holding their heads listening to this nonsense
In principle, technical errors are also paid, such as instead of the real coefficient 1.01, 101 is written, and 101 is paid. There have been such court decisions and decisions of regulators in the USA and Australia.
similar case
I remember perfectly where I was on June 23, 2017 – I was shopping. I got a bet notification on my smartphone: Federer vs. Khachanov. The minimum winning odds for Federer were 1.26, but 888sport was offering odds of 8.50.
With such a large discrepancy, this was an extremely profitable bet. So I placed a bet of €100. Just as I saw that 888sport accepted my bet, I placed another €100. I tried to place a third bet to complete the €300 I wanted to place, but 888sport left it as “pending approval”.
I was not wrong, a few minutes later my bets showed up as canceled.
It's time to hire a lawyer.
The judges' decision implies the belief that:
1 – The cancellation of the bet was an abuse
2– Risks should be divided between the bookmaker and the bettor
3 – Bookmakers cannot make unilateral decisions regarding the application of their rules
4– If there was an error on the bookmaker's part, it cannot be passed on to the user
Therefore, in short, the plaintiff claims that the defendant cannot refuse to pay out his winning bets by canceling them unilaterally and unreasonably (if there was any mistake on his part, it cannot be transferred to the consumer) and on the basis of such an alleged clause, which is unfair and therefore null and void, as contested by the plaintiff, under the General Commercial Conditions Act (the "rule in question" being that of the accession) and the General Consumer and Consumers Act, and in conclusion asks that the claim be condemned to pay the aforementioned 750 for each bet, together with its legal interests.
https://winnerodds.com/how-i-beat-888sport-in-court-and-got-paid/