3800000% in Under Four Hours Online

Gambler who kept winning could lose 650000 jackpot

"The company, based in Woking, is refusing to pay Mr Venturi, saying the bets breached the website's terms and conditions, and his winnings amounted to 'unjust enrichment'."

I'm torn about this and think it should have been settled out of court. I know there will be a lot of people here that think the casino should pay every last cent, but I believe some onus is on the player in such an extraordinary situation.

It would certainly be wrong in my view if they don't wind up giving him a substantial amount.

You don't get any money back for "unjust enrichment" of the casino. So yes, they should pay every last cent.

I would wonder just what this software flaw was, why no one else was affected by it, why testing did not detect it.
The player did what he was supposed to do and had no way of knowing it was not a streak of luck.
The casino wrote the software and is in a position to bear the loss.

When a machine mistakenly displays a large payout in a B&M casino, the normal practice is to nullify it.
The casino is not held required to pay anything that was displayed.
This is obviously a software bug, so I don't see it being any different and so the outcome being any different.

He does have a good claim for damages, though.

Quote: FleaStiff

I would wonder just what this software flaw was

Quote:

was charged for only one in six of the 6,670 wagers he placed

So it's not extra aces in the deck, it's more like not removing chips from losing bets on a craps table.

Quote: FleaStiff

I would wonder just what this software flaw was, why no one else was affected by it, why testing did not detect it.

Maybe he was right. Maybe he was unbelievably lucky.

That would certainly explain why no one else was affected by the "bug."

Hmmmm... an online casino not wanting to payout bets... why does that sound familiar?

I'm sorry, but while I tend not to agree with some of the Contrarians on here, anybody who would risk .01 in an online casino is taking a risk. I would never trust any website casino, even if they were completely legal in every jurisdiction and there was a government watchdog set up for the players. There's too much risk with computer crashes, server crashes, not to mention bugs and no way to tell if results are truly random.

Say what you will, but no RNG is TRULY random, as there are only a finite system of numbers to work with. In a casino, it's not possible to cycle through those numbers in a player's lifetime, but on a computer, where you can point and click, you'd get through the numbers much faster... I just don't trust it at all.

Tilt -

Your arguments aside, this is a new twist.

This casino is not saying that the customer violated some obscure fine-print terms. They are saying that he, and he alone, cheated. The mechanism for cheating apparently was that he was too stupid to realize that he shouldn't have been so lucky.

The recent story of a guy who withdrew $1.5mil from ATM machines truly IS stupid for not thinking they wouldn't catch up to him.

But this gambler? Is he really supposed to stop and ask why he is so lucky, and be prepared to offer the casino their money back?

" Hmmmm... an online casino not wanting to payout bets... why does that sound familiar?"

Next you will be saying some politicians are dishonest !

Quote: P90

So it's not extra aces in the deck, it's more like not removing chips from losing bets on a craps table.

Well that is known as a Refresh Rate programming error and it has been around for over twenty years and any casino hiring such a dumb programmer should be held accountable for it.

I would hold a company liable for making a Refresh Rate error on an xray machine or on a robot that went haywire or on a airplane navigational device.

Quote: FleaStiff

Well that is known as a Refresh Rate programming error and it has been around for over twenty years and any casino hiring such a dumb programmer should be held accountable for it.

I would hold a company liable for making a Refresh Rate error on an xray machine or on a robot that went haywire or on a airplane navigational device.

You are probably against Doctors burying their mistakes too. Talk about Judgemental.

Quote: Tiltpoul

Say what you will, but no RNG is TRULY random, as there are only a finite system of numbers to work with.

This is only true with software driven PRNG. Hardware based RNGs are truly random.

As to the original story, I think a simple solution is at hand. If Mr. Venturi was only charge for one out of six of his bets, simply go back and charge him for the other 5 of 6 bets. He'll either still be in a positive position, in which case pay him the amount, or he'll be in a negative position, in which case the casino should just ignore that, and let him be at a balance of 0.

If a person bought 6 lottery tickets, but only got charged for 1 of them, it would make sense to make that person pay for the other 5 lottery tickets. Naturally, of course, if all 6 lottery tickets are losers, then the buyer of the ticket(s) isn't going to go back and show that he needs to pay for 5 more. But if one or more of the lottery tickets are winners, then in order to collect, the person would have to pay up what he owes.

The casinos argument seems to be that because Mr. Venturi was only paying for 1 out of 6 bets, he was able to make more bets than a normal person could. However, it stands to reason that some other player may have "hit the button" at the same time as one of Mr. Venturi's non-paid bets and thus won instead of him. Just because he wasn't charged for 5 of the 6 bets shouldn't disqualify him from whatever he may have won on those 5 bets. It should just be that the cost of placing the 5 bets is also removed from his winnings.

On the flip side, I don't believe for an instant that Mr. Venturi is completely innocent in the matter. I think he quickly realized that he was only being charged for a fraction of his actual bets, and seeing that, he constantly kept making bets as quickly as he could. He might have figured that the quicker he could make bets, the fewer he would be charged for. The real reason he stopped was fatigue.

Just wanted to mention that the company running this casino isn't some obscure cheat, it's a somewhat large corporation that runs brick and mortar casinos and employs 17k (Caesar's has 70k and Sands has 40k). I'm really, really surprised they didn't settle.

I've come to the conclusion that if the online casino can recreate the session entirely (no guessing or estimating whatsoever) then it should be within their rights to adjust the account balance. I find this no different than someone getting an incorrect payout and being asked to return it later. This is all assuming that a third party is able to make sure that the online casino doesn't flat out lie about the session records.

It would not surprise me if the casino had the usual "malfunction voids all pays and plays" rule. This would seem like a malfunction to me.

Quote: FleaStiff

Well that is known as a Refresh Rate programming error and it has been around for over twenty years and any casino hiring such a dumb programmer should be held accountable for it.

Agreed. What I disagree with is that the extent of accountability, i.e. damages, should be determined by the final number that the broken piece of software mistakenly stopped on.

What if he won 1 trillion dollars and the gambling device was owned by US government - would we print a new banknote for the occasion?

Rather, the damages here should compensate for his wasted time and wasted money, as the company let it get to this point.

Quote: P90

Rather, the damages here should compensate for his wasted time and wasted money, as the company let it get to this point.

I agree, but I think there's a distinct possibility the guy involved was a douchebag unwilling to deal at all. Again, with such a large company you have to believe they tried to settle at some point.

If this was you, how much would you be willing to settle for? 5-10% is more than fair in my opinion and would have cost Eurobet / Coral Group bad press.

Quote: ahiromu

If this was you, how much would you be willing to settle for?

1/3 to 1/2 of the estimated cost of going to court, if the lawyers think the company will win. 2/3 to 1 1/3 of such costs, if the lawyers think the company will lose.

Assuming no insurance, of course.

Quote: Wizard

It would not surprise me if the casino had the usual "malfunction voids all pays and plays" rule. This would seem like a malfunction to me.

The ordinary and customary meaning of malfunction is an occurrence contrary to normal operation. We would ALL agree that a broken gear, an electrical pulse-like discharge, an externally induced vibration, a spilled beverage are all malfunctions. What happened here is the machine DID follow its instructions, it was the instructions that were incorrect.

The analogy is pressing elevator buttons... if you press Eleven and it takes you to the Basement once due to a secret Air Force test of static electricity that is a malfunction, but if it takes you to the Basement each and every time because they miswired the panel, that is not a malfunction. If they thought it was a RNG but instead it was very, very non-random, that is their mistake, but it is not a malfunction.

Malfunction voids all pays and plays is fine, but it has to be an actual malfunction rather than the correct result of an improperly designed game.

A refresh rate error is an obvious programming consideration and any casino foolish enough to put some device in play without accounting for it, should be held to their bargain. The player didn't think the machine was wrong, he just thought he was on a really lucky streak. And the person whom the law should protect is not the ACTUAL player but the class of players most in need of protection: the slightly inebriated and not fully informed player of average math skills. The casino wants dumb drunks to be playing there, so they can not later hold the players to the standards of a sober and alert Wizard. The law should protect a player of average sobriety such as found in the casino and average awareness of the games and average awareness of statistical expectations.

Just because some of the posters on this forum would have known "something is wrong" at point X, doesn't mean the law should allow the casino to escape liability at point X. The casino cultivates a client base and provides free booze so the person to be protected by the law is not the sober expert but the slightly sloshed novice of average intelligence and average math ability.

Quote: ahiromu

If this was you, how much would you be willing to settle for? 5-10% is more than fair in my opinion and would have cost Eurobet / Coral Group bad press.

Assuming that I'd be behind if the software worked properly, all trip expenses plus legal costs plus my time's worth (double daily income) rounded up, if playing good.

Exact win amount matters very little, although it can serve as an additional pressure point. So another amount to consider is sqrt(min(win,assets)) in thousands. The probability of getting the full win awarded in court decreases roughly at that rate, so that's the value of the risk they'd be taking by going to court, if playing bad.

Quote: FleaStiff

The ordinary and customary meaning of malfunction is an occurrence contrary to normal operation. We would ALL agree that a broken gear, an electrical pulse-like discharge, an externally induced vibration, a spilled beverage are all malfunctions. What happened here is the machine DID follow its instructions, it was the instructions that were incorrect.

I doubt anyone in a position to decide would see it that way.
At worst it would be that programming errors do happen - it may not be a broken gear, but it's a wrong gear being installed by mistake. That's still a malfunction, even if caused by human error... just like most malfunctions are.

Or it would be blamed on the programmer, because the instructions of the casino owner (who is the one you are suing) were to make the machine pay out 90-99%. Now good luck holding the programmer responsible, you'll probably get it dissed with prejudice before even getting a trial date.

Hi, i am Bruno Venturi. I would like to tell all the real story so everybody will make an idea about all this.
60 seconds is a lottery with numbers from 0 to 36, every 60 seconds there is a draw of 6 numbers. The player can bet on the colors, sum, lotto etc.
On lotto if you bet on 2 numbers and you win the odds are 1/42, 3 numbers 1/360.
the player can also repeat the bets for the next 5 draws.
I started playing the game on 28.01.2009 at 20:15. I played on 3 numbers combinations without repeating bets.
I won for 2 times with 20 cent and one time with 50 cent. I have continued playing on couple of numbers making many bets (single and repeated).
I started winning with 5 and 10 euro (so every time i won 210 and 420 €).
I remember you that i have lost many times too. I didn't win always.
Any way i started increasing my bets to 200 € so for every couple of numbers i won 8400 €.
Eurobet 60 seconds is a game certificated that has the RNG system random number generator.
I finished playing at 23.30.
On 29.01.2009 i phoned to the call center. the operator recognited my winning and asked to me the iban code to transfer the money.I didn't have with me so i phoned again after 5 minutes.At this bpoint the operator said that for this amount of winning the game dipartment had to do some controls and that was a routine.
He told me that my accoun should have been closed for 3 days.
I printed every thig on the site and the game list too.
After 3 days an operator phoned me and sayd that my winning was not genuine and that they withdraw my winning, 707.000 €, she told me that i had to be happy because they had reopened the account so i could plkay again.
I told them to write me an email with all this, then i logged in and i saw that on my account the balance was 852,02 € ( i started with 20 euro).
My italian lawyer said to me to not touch those money because they should have sent to me a message like this : Mr. Venturi thank you for accepting our settlement.
On my account i noted that everything had been deleted (game list, betting history etc.) I asked them why all this and they said that they had a software error and the game list had been deleted so they could not pay me.
My italian lawyer sent a letter in wich there was my game list printed , they answered that they made an error to tell me that the software bug deleted the game list and that the software bug had not debited the multiple bets.( anyway when the account had been reopened they had deleted everything)
Looking my betting list i noted that there were not the multiple bets, but i had won some bets and lost many bets.
The problem is that the player (me) have 50 seconds to place the bets between 2 draws, so i didn't look always the balance. I came in London and started a claim against them, because it's real that the software bug had not debited some bets but it's real that i didn't play always multiple bets and of 5 repeats but of 2- 3 and 4 repeats.
In their first defence deposited in june 2011 they wrote that after their investigation the bug had not debited me 222.000 € so, if they should have lost the claim they wanted to pay only 445.000 €, this defence was amended in december 2011 and this concept was the same.
In april 2012 eurobet changed the lawyer and this wanted to reamend again the defence and wanted to say that every my bet from the beginning to the end was a multiple bet of 5 . It was not true, only a robot can play in this way, i made many single bets too.
So, they said that my not debited bets were 922.000 €, my winnings were 865.000 € so i had to pay them 58.000 €!!!!!!!! and that they had wrong the other calculations.
My Lawyer asked to their only witness miss Emma Bell this questions:

do you have a record about this software error? NO

Did someone repair this error? do you have an invoice, a firm name? I DON'T KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE

Did you advice the gambling commission about all this? NO, WE FORGOT

When did you became aware about the software error? WHEN Mr. VENTURI PHONED

Did Mr. VEnturi played honestly? YES

Dear friends, they have won, i will make appeal to Strasburgo but the judge Simon Brown Has decided in 2 minutes about the matter without looking a paper, they don't have nothing about the software error. We are talking about the gala group, how is it possible?They have made the calculations very well and then have thought: why we have to pay money to this man? we have the opportunity to tell that all his bets were multiple bets and so we will not pay anything.
They have been afraid to create a previous in the gambling.
I am sorry for my english but i hope you have understood.

Thanks
Bruno

I wanted to give this a bump since it seems like we got a response from the person involved, of course it could be a hoax but what would be the point? Mr Venturi, if you're still reading this, I'd like to know if they are actually going after you for the 58000 Euro difference.

For anyone that doesn't know, a lot of the world switches the use of "," and "." when it comes to numbers. So $55,00 would be 55 dollars and zero cents and $55.000 would be 55 thousand dollars.

I think his Barrister needs to pound on the fact that there are no records kept by the Host Casino of the incident, other than the Player in question "won".

Hi, I am really Bruno Venturi, during the claim they said that they didn't want to ask me to pay the difference. Anyway monday 2.06.2012 i will be in London and tuesday i will deposit the appeal.
During the trial it was very clear that the judge was favorable for eurobet, their barrister kept me for 2 hours and half in the witness box and the judge didn't say anything.
When my barrister was questioning their witness , the judge after 1 hour and half asked him : for how long time do you think to continue?
there has been many little signals to understand that the balance was only on one side.

Thanks

Bruno

There is another important question about the claim.
Mrs Bell ( the only eurobet witness) in her witness statemend said:
The most important evidence to show that Mr Venturi's balance was not debited are the screenshot but we cannot show to the court because Eurobet.com was defunct.
My question is: you are one of the biggest company for gambling, you have an important claim against you (1.000.000 £ with interests), you have the possibility to show to the court that you are in a right position in 1 minute and what do you do? you close the website without to record anything.
Is it possible?
How can a judge issue a judgement without evidence but only words?

Bruno