Punter suing BetEasy says Crown opened her betting account

by

A punter who is suing BetEasy for close to $1.2 million in unpaid winnings says her betting account was opened for her by a Crown employee when she joined the casino's Signature Club.

Renee Bell is pursuing the difference of $1.44 million in the Supreme Court after landing a monster parlay bet of which BetEasy, formerly CrownBet, paid out just $250,000.

https://static.ffx.io/images/$zoom_0.373%2C$multiply_2.1164%2C$ratio_1.5%2C$width_756%2C$x_0%2C$y_0/t_crop_custom/q_62%2Cf_auto/42d55c780c3a267e9eefa469fb8349bd9823af04
A $1.4 million betting payout hinged on West Coast beating Richmond during round nine in 2018.Credit: Getty Images

In a defence filed on May 29 in the Supreme Court, BetEasy says it is in its terms and conditions upon signing up with the bookmaker that it pays out a maximum of $250,000 a day, regardless of the potential winnings of a bet.

BetEasy says in the documents Bell opened an account with the betting agency in August, 2015.

Bell says in a reply filed with the court that she didn't agree to the terms as she didn't create the account. She says she wasn't aware she had a CrownBet account until she received an email three days after joining Crown Casino's Signature Club.

"When she joined the Crown Signature Club she did not agree to CrownBet's terms and conditions and such terms and conditions were not brought to her attention; and when she first logged in to her CrownBet account she did not agree to CrownBet's terms and conditions and such terms and conditions were not brought to her attention," court documents read.

Bell placed $500 worth of multi-bets including a $100 five-leg all-up that returned $1,260,748.80, successfully tipping horses Jaminzah ($16), Marcel From Madrid ($9), Praguematist ($4.80) and Miss Iano ($9.50) to win their respective races around Australia on Saturday, May 19, 2018, as well as West Coast to beat Richmond ($1.92) on Sunday, May 20.

Bell's other four $100 bets all used the same horses - all of which were either part-owned or bred by relatives - and football match, but with different combinations of three horses to place and one to win, which returned another $182,447.10.

However, BetEasy paid out just $250,000 for Bell's first successful bet plus her $100 stake and cancelled the other four bets, refunding her $400.

In BetEasy's defence, it says by using its website, opening an account or by placing bets, punters agree to the terms and conditions published on its website.

"The maximum payout for a multi-bet for racing and sports or a combination of both is $250,000. It is your responsibility to ensure that it stakes according to the limits," BetEasy said.

BetEasy has been contacted for comment.

A directions hearing is listed in the Supreme Court on November 13.

BetEasy's website is now directing punters to Sportsbet after their parent companies officially merged in May.