Gambler vows to fight for damages
Mar 24 2008 by The Journal
HE lost more than £2m hooked on the “buzz” of betting.
Now compulsive gambler Graham Calvert has launched an appeal after a High Court judge ruled bookmakers William Hill did not have to award damages despite finding they failed to take reasonable steps to implement their own self-exclusion policy.
The father-of-two, of Houghton-le-Spring, near Sunderland asked the bookies to stop taking his money. However due to an internal error just weeks later he was allowed to bet thousands again through telephone gambling.
Earlier this month Judge Mr Justice Briggs said that the bookies had a duty to take reasonable care to exclude Mr Calvert.
However he ruled that “pathological gambling” would still probably have led to his financial ruin, but over a longer time.
The judgment highlighted the need for a national database allowing problem gamblers to self-exclude from all bookmakers in one go.
But in his first interview since his High Court appearance 28-year-old Mr Calvert said he has vowed to fight on in a bid to seek a payout and personal injury damages.
Mr Calvert, a greyhound trainer, has also called on the Government to step in to help young people hooked on gambling which he says is “more addictive than heroin.”
He said: “We are appealing, my legal team and barrister are doing the appeal on a no-win, no-fee basis. The case has made new law and out of the three points we took we won two of them and lost one.
“They said that I would have gambled elsewhere but for me what would be the point of betting £50 here, £150 there, what would I get out of it?
“When I self-excluded with them (William Hill) I didn’t self-exclude because I lost money, I did it when I had about £750,000 in the bank.
“It was at that point that I really realised I had a problem, when you’re gambling and you don’t need the money.
“I was using telephone gambling which just becomes out of control, you’re not actually dealing with chips or money instead you are just dealing with numbers on the phone; you lose all reality of it and just carry on.
“I have been around gambling for most of my life.
“It’s a known thing in the industry that if you back a winner with them and have one or two wins then you will get your bet reduced. If you’re a professional they will limit you.
“They watch you and monitor you, if you’re a problem gambler or a mug, which is the same thing, then they will take your eyes out.”
Mr Calvert, of Sedgeletch Farm, initially had success and from 2000 says he made an average of £50,000 a year betting for the next five years.
But he began having problems and started borrowing to feed his habit.
He lost £347,000 after backing the USA to win in the 2006 Ryder Cup and he placed huge multiple bets within hours.
The court heard that after opening his new account in 2006 he lost almost every bet for eight days with stakes of between £2,000 and £50,000. “When you get to that stage, everything in your head is gone,” he added.
“It is absolutely no different than being addicted to heroin.
“I want to tell people to stop gambling; you are in a no win situation because if they are any good in what they do the bookmakers will eventually close them down.
“If you have the money give the money to a friend or family, anything so you do not have access to it – and seek help.”
Mr Calvert’s solicitor Tiejha Smyth, of city firm Ward Hadaway, said an appeal would be lodged and could go ahead by the end of the year. She said: “This was never a case about a sore loser or someone who had an unlucky run. We only brought it because he had clearly said to William Hill that he had a problem and he did what he could to try and help himself.
“It (the case) has expanded the law of negligence and the circumstances in which a duty of care will be warranted.”
David Hood, spokesman for William Hill, did not return a call for a comment when approached by The Journal.
Graham Calvert is due to appear before Newcastle Crown Court later this year charged with firearms and associated drug offences.
