Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

espn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 232 posts

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#221

Post by Kim_Bruning »

tom_ wrote: post #78
dumbfounder wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disgusting? So if you see a sign on a car for sale that says $19,95 because a digit fell off, the dealer is obligated to sell it to you at that price? People and systems make mistakes, that doesn't mean it's "disgusting" that they protect themselves financially from those mistakes.

The price sticker is an advertisement, not a binding contract. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invitation_to_treat

This is true in some countries, but not in others. Eg. in the Netherlands it is binding the moment a customer indicates they accept it.

(On the other hand -relevant to the topic- an agreement may be declared void in the case of "obvious error"; so Fanduel could possibly have been off the hook if they had been operating in .nl .)

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#222

Post by TomMarius »

jackvalentine wrote: post #219
TomMarius wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There can be varying degrees of human involvement. The smart contract could say "a human decides" - and a human decides. But the contract could describe bounds that the human has, limits on how much time he has, etc. The point of smart contract is that if it really is "a human decides", it's explicit - and I wouldn't enter such contract. Instead I'd ask the other party to be more specific and integrate better escrow…

So you want smart contracts with human elements in them so you can reject them for better smart contracts with less human elements?

I don't want anything, I'm just saying what a smart contract is - a 100% explicit contract that has many possibilities including varying degrees of human involvement - all up to the contract itself. People have different tastes.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#223

Post by gojomo »

DannyBee wrote: post #189
gojomo wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't trust a surface reading of one section of the regulations, unless you're a lawyer with specific expertise in New Jersey gambling law and precedent. There could easily be other offsetting law, regulation, or precedent. There might have been a prior decision which effectively gave "written approval" to void future egregious odds/payout errors. There may have been "prior written approval" of the house rules a…

1. I am a lawyer, licensed in 4 states (among other bars) :) 2. I grew up in NJ and am quite familiar with the gambling regs (but i admit to not having paid attention in the past few years) 3. I checked with other NJ lawyers.

I am not a lawyer. I grew up in NJ but I'm more familiar with the policies of Nevada gambling firms.

But, I have a perhaps-unreasonable amount of confidence in my understanding of regulator-regulatee dynamics. I further think FanDuel competently understood their legal environment before making their statements defending the non-payment to the press. (If their experts knew they'd eventually have to pay anyway, why take the PR hit?) And finally, I believe that on general principles of fairness, such blatant errors should be voidable.

So, would you like to bet me $20, even-money, that your "FanDuel is gonna lose this one" prediction comes to pass? Me, a rando non-lawyer armchair commenter, versus your many credentials, familiarity-with-the-gambling-regs, and confirming opinions from other NJ lawyers?

You win if FanDuel ever pays this bettor the full $82,610 – whether due to public outcry or any action by relevant legal authorities. I win if the bettor accepts a settlement for less, such as the tokens-of-apology that FanDuel has already offered.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#224

Post by dragonwriter »

gojomo wrote: post #223
DannyBee wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I am a lawyer, licensed in 4 states (among other bars) :) 2. I grew up in NJ and am quite familiar with the gambling regs (but i admit to not having paid attention in the past few years) 3. I checked with other NJ lawyers.

I am not a lawyer. I grew up in NJ but I'm more familiar with the policies of Nevada gambling firms. But, I have a perhaps-unreasonable amount of confidence in my understanding of regulator-regulatee dynamics. I further think FanDuel competently understood their legal environment before making their statements defending the non-payment to the press. (If their experts knew they'd eventually have to pay anyway, why tak…

> And finally, I believe that on general principles of fairness, such blatant errors should be voidable.

If they’re voidable when the house loses, then they must be void ab initio and refunded when the house wins, otherwise it's a system of fraudulently inducing bets.

I'm surprised your “general principles of fairness” are so biased in favor of the party with more power and control.

> You win if FanDuel ever pays this bettor the full $82,610 – whether due to public outcry or any action by relevant legal authorities. I win if the bettor accepts a settlement for less, such as the tokens-of-apology that FanDuel has already offered.

That's a bad bet, because even if FanDuel legally owes the full amount and the trial outcome was somehow not in any doubt by the claimant, settlement for less because reimbursement of costs is not guaranteed to the victor in US civil process would still be a normal outcome.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#225

Post by gojomo »

dragonwriter wrote: post #224
gojomo wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a lawyer. I grew up in NJ but I'm more familiar with the policies of Nevada gambling firms. But, I have a perhaps-unreasonable amount of confidence in my understanding of regulator-regulatee dynamics. I further think FanDuel competently understood their legal environment before making their statements defending the non-payment to the press. (If their experts knew they'd eventually have to pay anyway, why tak…

> And finally, I believe that on general principles of fairness, such blatant errors should be voidable. If they’re voidable when the house loses, then they must be void ab initio and refunded when the house wins, otherwise it's a system of fraudulently inducing bets. I'm surprised your “general principles of fairness” are so biased in favor of the party with more power and control. > You win if FanDuel ever pays thi…

Yes, if against all odds the house won a bet with similarly-erroneous odds, the betters would be entitled to a void by the same principle.

Typos, data-entry-mistakes, system glitches, software bugs which remain even after normal levels of care, data-corruption, etc shouldn't create liabilities of arbitrary magnitude between people when the error is manifestly obvious. Relative "power" has nothing to do with it. "Control" maybe a little, but here the bettor had the control necessary to strike during the short erroneous window.

> That's a bad bet

Not according to ~DannyBee's "Fanduel is gonna lose" and "law on this is pretty clear" and "checked with other NJ lawyers" confidence, I would think. If the law is so clear, the bettor could possibly get interest or punitive damages, as well!

But if you'd consider taking some fairer version of the bet, suggest stakes/odds/victory conditions, and I might be game! My core prediction is that Fanduel will only pay some token amount as a gesture-of-apology, at their own discretion, and nothing close-to the full amount, because the precedent is that important to them.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#226

Post by dragonwriter »

gojomo wrote: post #225
dragonwriter wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And finally, I believe that on general principles of fairness, such blatant errors should be voidable. If they’re voidable when the house loses, then they must be void ab initio and refunded when the house wins, otherwise it's a system of fraudulently inducing bets. I'm surprised your “general principles of fairness” are so biased in favor of the party with more power and control. > You win if FanDuel ever pays thi…

Yes, if against all odds the house won a bet with similarly-erroneous odds, the betters would be entitled to a void by the same principle. Typos, data-entry-mistakes, system glitches, software bugs which remain even after normal levels of care, data-corruption, etc shouldn't create liabilities of arbitrary magnitude between people when the error is manifestly obvious. Relative "power" has nothing to do with it. "Cont…

> Yes, if against all odds the house won a bet with similarly-erroneous odds

“Against all odds”? We're talking about a event that erroneously gets posted highly attractive odds for bettors, with no special features of the original odds or probabilities. You'd expect, over time, about half of the bets for such contracts to be won by each side.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#227

Post by gojomo »

dragonwriter wrote: post #226
gojomo wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if against all odds the house won a bet with similarly-erroneous odds, the betters would be entitled to a void by the same principle. Typos, data-entry-mistakes, system glitches, software bugs which remain even after normal levels of care, data-corruption, etc shouldn't create liabilities of arbitrary magnitude between people when the error is manifestly obvious. Relative "power" has nothing to do with it. "Cont…

> Yes, if against all odds the house won a bet with similarly-erroneous odds “Against all odds”? We're talking about a event that erroneously gets posted highly attractive odds for bettors, with no special features of the original odds or probabilities. You'd expect, over time, about half of the bets for such contracts to be won by each side.

Right, I should have said "this bet". But the same goes for any other bet with clearly erroneous odds.

However, bettors choose which offered odds to bet (while books accept whatever matches their 'board', within limits). And, good bettor practice is to check slips before leaving the window.

Thus a bettor can in practice exercise more discretion/control, in such a situation of odds-error-against-them, than (non-managerial) window clerks. They can simply not bet at bad odds, in a way that's harder for the bookie'srote systems, and they can usually even cancel a slip printed with surprisingly bad odds, on-the-spot. So errors-in-the-houses-favor will become actual live slips, needing exceptional voiding, very rarely.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#228

Post by LocalH »

thejenk wrote: post #158
goobynight wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. If you make system creation more expensive, the house needs to collect more juice. I think most sports betting consumers here prefer the current, lower cost, more diverse system with a slightly higher error rate. I'd reckon most people complaining here don't even bet on sports, but want to grandstand against bookies. I can understand that I guess.

I'm not going to comment on moral or legal responsibilities of bookies and gambling companies, because I am uneducated on both subjects, but I found your use of the term "collect more juice" really interesting. It seems odd to relate pulling revenue from fruit to pulling revenue from people's incorrect bets. Is that an industry term?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vigorish

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#229

Post by turtlecloud »

gojomo wrote: post #223
DannyBee wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I am a lawyer, licensed in 4 states (among other bars) :) 2. I grew up in NJ and am quite familiar with the gambling regs (but i admit to not having paid attention in the past few years) 3. I checked with other NJ lawyers.

I am not a lawyer. I grew up in NJ but I'm more familiar with the policies of Nevada gambling firms. But, I have a perhaps-unreasonable amount of confidence in my understanding of regulator-regulatee dynamics. I further think FanDuel competently understood their legal environment before making their statements defending the non-payment to the press. (If their experts knew they'd eventually have to pay anyway, why tak…

I’ll talk you on your bet. Don’t back out like Fanduel!!!

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#230

Post by gojomo »

turtlecloud wrote: post #229
gojomo wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a lawyer. I grew up in NJ but I'm more familiar with the policies of Nevada gambling firms. But, I have a perhaps-unreasonable amount of confidence in my understanding of regulator-regulatee dynamics. I further think FanDuel competently understood their legal environment before making their statements defending the non-payment to the press. (If their experts knew they'd eventually have to pay anyway, why tak…

I’ll talk you on your bet. Don’t back out like Fanduel!!!

OK, we have a bet! How can I ping you if I win? (My contact info is in my profile.)

(Still open to more action, on same or similar terms, from ~DannyBee, ~dragonewriter, or others.)

Post reply on HN