High-Stakes Gambler Sues Betfair Over £1.5M in Losses
British property investor Lee Gibson is suing Betfair again, claiming the operator failed to act despite clear signs of gambling addiction. The 47-year-old, who reportedly lost £1.5 million betting on soccer, hopes his case will set a new legal precedent for how operators manage high-spending customers.
Decade of Gambling and Mounting Losses
Lee Gibson, a 47-year-old real estate investor, is appealing a previous High Court ruling after losing nearly £1.5 million (approximately $2 million) betting on soccer over a ten-year period between 2009 and 2019.
Gibson, who built his fortune through property, claims that Betfair ignored his escalating betting activity, which totaled over 30,000 bets in that decade, a pattern he now argues should have been recognized as a “red flag” for a gambling addiction.
- See also: Betfair Login and Registration Guide
Although he initially found the experience “enthralling and exciting,” his losses eventually became “unsustainable,” leading to the lawsuit seeking £1 million ($1.33 million) in damages.
Last year, however, High Court Judge Nigel Bird dismissed Gibson’s initial claim, ruling that Betfair could not reasonably have known the extent of his gambling problem. The judge noted that Gibson had “consistently and often reassured Betfair that he was able to fund his gambling” and had even provided supporting financial documents.
Appeal Raises Questions Over Operator Responsibility
Gibson has now taken his case to the Court of Appeal, seeking £1 million ($1.33 million) in damages. His legal team argues that Betfair should have recognized warning signs in his betting behavior, especially given that he was a VIP customer with a dedicated relationship manager. According to the lawsuit, Betfair only suspended his account in March 2019, after his losses had already reached £1.5 million. Yash Kulkarni KC, representing Gibson said:
He argued that the High Court failed to properly apply UK licensing conditions, which require gambling operators to refuse service to customers showing signs of addiction.
- Check also: What is Betfair Exchange?
Betfair Defends Its Position
Betfair disputes the claim, insisting it had no actual knowledge of Gibson’s gambling addiction. Jonathan Davies-Jones KC, representing the operator, told the Court of Appeal:
“cannot be expected that Betfair to act on speculation alone.”
He added that the original judgment was “entirely sound.” Davies-Jones argued that even if Betfair had been aware of Gibson’s gambling habits, that knowledge “would not automatically create a legal duty of care.”
Past attempts by problem gamblers to reclaim losses have largely failed in UK courts, but Gibson’s renewed challenge could prove pivotal. A ruling in his favor would represent a historic shift in how gambling operators are held accountable for monitoring and intervening in cases of harmful play.