Maltco sued for €1.5 million over horse bets pay-out

Australian man who claims to have won €1.5 million while betting on horse racing takes Maltco Lotteries and the Swedish Horse Racing Totalisator Board to court

File Photo
File Photo

An Australian man who claims to have won €1.5 million betting on horse racing, has taken Maltco Lotteries and the Swedish Horse Racing Totalisator Board to court after they refused a payout on the grounds that he had placed too many bets.

Aras Gogani had filed a sworn application before the First Hall of the Civil Court last year, explaining that he had bought a number of entries on a horse race in Sweden from the Maltco Iklin outlet in May 2019. The bets were offered on Maltco’s platform, but were a product sold by the Swedish Horse Racing Totalisator Board (ATG).

Having won the bets, he had gone to Maltco’s head office to claim his winnings, only to be told that the bets were being investigated. Gogani said that he could not definitively quantify his winnings as Malco were refusing to tell him, but calculated that it was around €1.5 million. He attached his calculations to the court application.

Towards the end of May 2019, Maltco had written to Gogani, informing him that his request for payment of his winnings was being refused on the instructions of ATG due to an alleged breach of ATG’s betting regulations.

The letter claimed that Gogani had exceeded the limit of 5,000 betting combinations, thereby breaching regulation 28 of the terms and conditions. But in his court application, Gogani’s lawyers Daniela Bugeja Mangion and Sarah Grech argue that there was no reference to limits on betting combinations in regulation 28, the online link to which redirects to ATG’s homepage.

Highlighting the fact that the EU’s Player Protection Directive stipulates that “Terms and Conditions shall be readily available and accessible to players at all times” and that in the case of remote gaming “the terms and conditions shall be no more than one click away from the homepage…” his lawyers argued that the plaintiff had been placing bets in this way for over a year before winning and had never been stopped or warned that he was exceeding any limits. He had won and lost small amounts with the same bets and had always been paid in the past, they added.

It was only after he won the substantial amount that he had been informed that he had exceeded the maximum number of bets, which he would always send to Maltco in advance, together with a bank guarantee, in order to make them aware of the wagers he was placing.

Maltco had written to Gogani, pointing out that the bets had all been placed in the space of less than an hour, alleging that he had been using “statistically generated systems” in placing his bets and that this violated ATG’s betting regulations, requiring him to forfeit all of his winnings.