The Paddy Power defeat in the High Court will have been of significant interest to the rest of the industry, with it potentially impacting the treatment of Ts & Cs across the sector.
The 45-page rulebook of terms and conditions was cited to justify the operator’s decision to not pay the “monster” £1,097,132.71 jackpot that her screen had indicated she had won.
At the centre of Paddy Power’s response to her complaint, the firm highlighted the clause stating the player “fully accepts and agrees that random number generator software will determine all outcomes of the game” and that Paddy Power “will not be liable” for payouts offered as a result of “systems or communication error”.
However, Justice Ritchie backed the claimant against Paddy Power, ruling that rules promoted to customers should take precedence over Terms & Conditions.
Operator Responsibility
Prior to the ruling, Martyn Hannah, MD of online casino comparison site, Comparasino, laid out the case as he revealed his belief that “online casinos are simply not being transparent with players.”
Hannah commented: “The systems and software behind online casinos are incredibly complex, but surely, it’s the responsibility of the operator to ensure those systems are in check. In the event of a glitch, it’s hard to see an argument for why the consumer should bear the brunt of this.
“And to describe what the player sees as “wallpaper” does little to foster trust between consumers and online casino brands – trust remains a huge concern for players when deciding where to play even when looking to sign up with a household name brand.
“I’m not saying that operators don’t have a right to enforce their terms and conditions and that players shouldn’t be familiar with (and understand) them before playing.
“But what I am saying is cases like this show just how complex terms and conditions are, and ultimately, the disputes that come from any challenges to them are bad optics and have the potential for significant brand and reputational damage.”
The Time for Reflection
Looking ahead, Hannah emphasised his belief that online casinos will need to take a long reflection on what players are agreeing to when they sign up and play, and the reality around their understanding of T&Cs.
He stated: “Do I have a solution to this problem? Yes and no. I don’t operate an online casino, so I don’t understand the legal position operators are in and to what degree such comprehensive and complex T&Cs are necessary.
“But what I do know is that players still don’t trust online casino brands and often become frustrated, annoyed and even angry when they don’t receive the experience they expect. This is certainly the case when it comes to bonuses, wins and payouts – this is why we’ve seen a huge spike in players looking for casinos with instant payouts.
“It might be that operators really can’t change their terms and conditions, but if that is the case, they need to do more to educate players as to what they actually contain and what impact it has on them.
“Forfeiting bonus winnings or refusing a payout because of a technical glitch and then pointing to a clause buried deep in the operator’s terms and conditions essentially puts the onus back on the player and for me at least, that equates to poor customer service.
“I think if operators could be more transparent about their terms and conditions, simplify them where possible, educate players where complexities must exist and really ask if the clause is fair, they would be able to foster much deeper trust.”
