Betting

[kevoxpop]

I am reliably informed that if I place a bet with a bookmaker and win, he is not obliged to settle the bet because it is a 'gentlemans agreement' However I can find nothing in writing to confirm this by way of precedent. Does anyone have anything to support this claim?

[barry1010]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2002/jun/15/cr editanddebt.jobsandmoney
Bookies have their own, painful ways of enforcing debts.

[barry1010]

It is s.18 Gaming Act 1845 that made gaming and gambling debts unenforcable, but this may be different now because of Section 334(1)(c) of the Gambling Act 2005 which repealled s.18/

[fredpuli47]

It is, barry The Gambling Act 2005 .s335 " The fact that a contract relates to gambling shall not prevent its enforcement"

Formerly any contract which was related to gambling was unenforceable.The old law was repealed at the behest of bookmakers.Modern big bookmakers may have enormous amounts of clients' credit on their books. They felt a bit aggrieved at not being able to get their money!

This may get rid of the significance, in the old law students' problem, of distingushing between a contract of insurance and one for gambling. (The insurance has 'an insurable interest' )

[barry1010]

I tend to think the bookies wanted the change precisely so they could take more bets on credit with the knowledge they could take action if needs be.
More debt = more bets.

[dzug]

Meanwhile the CC companies have decided to make payments to gambling sites cash advances so that they are not (directly at least) lending money for gambling