A Paddy Power customer has successfully sued the Irish firm after they refused to pay out on a £1 million jackpot win.
Corrine Durber, a gardener from Gloucestershire, thought she had won the seven-figure sum after landing the Monster Jackpot while playing Paddy Power’s Wild Hatter game.
But a technical glitch, according to the operator, meant that she was shown the wrong congratulatory message on screen… and was instead entitled to a smaller £20,000 prize instead.
However, Justice Ritchie – overseeing a High Court legal case that got underway a fortnight ago – has concluded that Mrs Durber should be paid out the full jackpot of £1,097,132; a decision that will have ramifications for the future of the online gambling industry.
Computer Says No
It was way back in October 2020 that Mrs Durber thought she had struck a mammoth win.
She was playing the Wild Hatter slot, which features basic gameplay – spinning the reels and hoping to land a matching combination of symbols – plus a bonus wheel. After one successful spin, Mrs Durber advanced to the bonus jackpot wheel.
As she took her turn, the wheel stopped and revealed a Monster Jackpot sum; a message declaring her £1 million+ win popping up on screen.
But as Mrs Durber waited to be paid – there tends to be a delay on payment for prizes of this size, she received some distressing news: a technical glitch in the game’s software meant that she had seen the wrong animation on her screen.
And, in actual fact, she was only entitled to the Daily Jackpot prize; a rather less life-changing amount of just over £20,000.
Understandably, Mrs Durber was furious. Surely if she’d been told that she’d won the Monster Jackpot, Paddy Power was liable to pay out said amount?
She found a lawyer and set to work proving her case, which after years of protracted discussions finally ended up in London’s High Court in February.
And on Wednesday of this week, the verdict was delivered…
What You See Is What You Get
The court was shown a recording of Mrs Durber’s winning spin.
It clearly showed the segment of the wheel labelled Monster Jackpot light up, with the pointer arrow on the wheel clearly showing that to be the winner.
However, legal representative of PPB Entertainment – the trading name of Paddy Power and Betfair – argued that an error in the game’s software had shown the wrong animation on screen relative to Mrs Durber’s spin. In reality, the Daily Jackpot segment of the wheel should have been illuminated.
Of course, Paddy Power’s terms and conditions – as is customary for online casino operators – absolved them of any blame, claiming that any technical malfunction of a game ‘voids all pays’. It’s a defence that has been used successfully in court battles before.
However, Mrs Durber – and her legal team – argued that she was a consumer of Paddy Power’s products and services, and is therefore afforded the same powers as detailed in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
The case came down to a seven-letter acronym: WYSIWYG, a shortening of ‘What You See Is What You Get.’ As Mrs Durber had seen the Monster Jackpot win on her screen, shouldn’t that be the prize that she gets?
It turns out that the presiding judge, Justice Ritchie, thought that it should…
Life Changing
After days of evidence gathering and deliberations, Justice Ritchie concluded that he was of the belief that online casino games should be subject to the unwritten rule of WYSIWYG – specifically, in this case, when the software glitch has been caused by human error.
“The scope of clause B2 did not cover human errors in programming the screen display of the game and hence did not entitle the defendant to make the claimant’s play void and/or to exclude liability for the claimant’s win shown on her screen,” the judge determined in his findings.
Justice Ritchie also declared that the ‘malfunction voids all pays’ line cannot be used in this case due to the Consumer Rights Act (2015). He granted Mrs Durber a summary judgement, which meant that – after four-and-a-half years – she will finally be paid the £1,097,132 that she’s owed.
“As you can imagine, I’m so relieved and happy that the judge has confirmed I fairly and squarely won £1m from Paddy Power,” Mrs Durber said while celebrating outside of the High Court.
“Obviously it will look after the children, from that we’ll pay their mortgages and we’re going to enjoy our retirement.”
A spokesperson for Paddy Power said that the firm would be ‘reviewing the judgement’ in due course.