From riches to refunds: Court orders gamblers to pay back R13 million 'winnings'
A large group of gamblers who won millions of rand ended up not so lucky following a high court ruling telling them to pay back the money.
The Pietermaritzburg High Court has ordered 159 gamblers to return R13 million they collectively won in an online betting platform following a system glitch that allowed them to gamble without risking a cent.
The gamblers placed their bets on a game owned by Hollywood sportsbook KwaZulu-Natal (Pty) Ltd called ‘Betgames Instant Lucky 7’ in December 2023.
The game was created by a third party and resembled the national lottery.
However, the draws occurred every 30 seconds. When the punters (gamblers) realised that there was a fault in the game, which did not deduct money while they placed their bets, they took advantage of it.
Between December 22 and 31, the gamblers had collectively won R13 million, with the lowest amount won being R3,000.
Nsikayesizwe Thobelani Gcabashe stated that he deposited R50 on December 28 and R850 the next day, placed 40 bets for four days, and won R443,700.
He said he withdrew the amount and transferred it to his personal banking account.
When Hollywood identified the glitch, it contacted all the winners and requested the return of the funds, but they refused. The company subsequently took the matter to court.
On January 5, 2024, Judge Jacqueline Henriques issued a temporary order ruling in the company’s favour. However, the court battle continued.
This week, Judge Robin Mossop SC stated that the company’s main relief in seeking to recover its money has been consistent.
The various banks, which included Capitec, Absa, African Bank, Discovery, and Nedbank, were ordered to freeze the accounts of the winners.
Judge Mossop stated he was not swayed by the affected players, who maintained that they did nothing wrong because they followed the rules and played with their deposited money in the betting game.
“The respondents gambled for free,” Judge Mossop declared.
“The wagers placed by the respondents through the impugned game were not valid. It must follow, therefore, that the respondents were not entitled to the winnings that they received from the impugned game and that they must be returned to the applicant.”
Judge Mossop said the winners used a template for their affidavits, which were the same, varying in only the amounts they won.
He said that he did not believe the players conspired to defraud the company.
“None of the respondents indicated who they specifically told about the impugned game, and it is, therefore, not possible to know whether the persons that they admitted telling are also respondents in this matter,” he explained.
Judge Mossop said the players might have told people who could not access the game.
“The respondents are scattered all over the province and the country, and are not confined to a specific area, nor has any relationship been established that links them one to the other.”