In a statement to the Herald, Consumer NZ says the customer could take the matter to the Disputes Tribunal if they were not satisfied with the evidence and response. If it was shown the company had mucked up, it should wear the costs of its mistake. If they're not satisfied with the response, and believe there's a case to answer, they could consider taking the matter to the Disputes Tribunal. Despite this, Consumer NZ says action could still be taken by the customer if they considered the compensation was insufficient.
The company would then need to decide whether it was going to provide the compensation on this basis. Smith and Partners senior solicitor Nathan Tetzlaff told the Herald on Sunday last week terms and conditions are typically an enforceable contract. Tetzlaff says there are three steps a consumer can take if they are not happy with the company's response.
In this sort of situation I would initially conduct a three-part assessment. In the case of a failure of technology, I would request proof from the provider to back up their claim. On Friday, Thomas said the agency "regrets the inconvenience caused by the serious technical issue which impacted our website in the early hours of May 2". Social Media and Trending Reporter for the nzherald. Nepe's mind started racing thinking about what he could do with the money.
I couldn't believe this was really happening," he told the Herald. Initially the TAB deposited the winnings into his betting account. But that money was later taken back by the betting agency. This left Nepe, who lives in Hawke's Bay, frustrated and scrambling for answers. Simon Thomas, the TAB's general manager of customer and betting, told the Herald in a statement they had suffered a "technical malfunction" and decided to void and refund all bets that were placed during a four-hour period.
This meant that there was an opportunity to bet on events that were all but over. It was very regrettable and we apologised to impacted customers for any inconvenience. This was an isolated incident which was quickly resolved. However, regrettably it did impact a small number of customers at the time. All six of the games Nepe bet on started at 2am, the same time the alleged technical malfunction occurred.
He laid the bets at 3. The TAB claims they voided bets during the malfunction, some of those were losing bets which they also refunded. Nepe disputes the TAB's claims of a malfunction and asked them to provide evidence of a technical malfunction. He claims the TAB had shown him odds on a different website at the time his bet was placed in a bid to prove their own odds were sustainably incorrect and a malfunction had occurred.
The Hawke's Bay punter says another betting agency's odds are not relevant to those displayed on the TAB's own platform.
0コメント