The Client Is Confused In The Names Of Bookmakers And Requires Compensation Through The Court

A puzzle story unfolded in the field of gambling, after the 1xbet bc client filed a lawsuit on 1xbet clone owners.Com – 1xstavka site.Ru. The victim misled the use of a similar name. Other interesting bookmakers read on our website.

For the period 2017-2018, oleg makarkin translated 1xbet more than 3.5 million rubles, without suspecting that licensed activities of this bc sites (1xbet.Com and 1-x-bet.Com) was discontinued in 2016 according to the conclusion of the fts, writes rbc. The activities of the owner of these sites – techinfusion ltd. – recognized illegal in the russian federation. But access to illegal sites for russians is still opened through «mirror» resources.

In misleading makarkina introduced a resource «1 schedule» – licensed bc, which is owned by the company «bookmaker pub». «1 schedule» actively advanced at popular tournaments and created the plaintiff with the illusion of 1xbet legality. That the last office is not licensed, makarkin learned much later. He announced that «bookmaker pub» damaged him, and demands that the losses are reimbursed through the court. About criminal interactions «bookmaker pub» and 1xbet also claims a consequence that is appropriate. Makarkin also has a witness on this proceedings.

Indition, the plaintiff is sued with payment systems «kiwi bank» and «yumani» for the fact that those allowed transactions against the company whose activities are recognized as illegal in the russian federation. But, in addition to implementing «successful» transactions, payment systems did not even inform the client that such translations are not protected by russian legislation. Recall that the owner «yumani» is sberbank.

At the same time a legal enterprise «parlan» start a collection of customer states that were injured from 1xbet activities, at the moment there are aredy received about hundreds of appeals.

Recall that recently a letter was sentown to the premiere of the russian federation with a proposal to cut into bookmakers in rights, 4h agency’s legal company partner negatively commented on this initiative.