Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by David Overton

  Firstly my background, my business was started my grandfather after the first world war, his licence was signed by Winston Churchill. He died in 1949 and the business was continued by my father and his brother. In 1978 my father transferred into the Tattersalls rings and I took over the business in 1987 and eventually I became the number one bookmaker in my section which was completely separated from the main ring, just as the rails bookmakers were.

  I expect that you have had submissions from a number of bookmakers.

  Our associations have asked us to write to our MPs with regard to the tenure of bookmakers positions from September 2012.

  I find it staggering that these people have the cheek to ask me and people like me to contact our MPs on this issue.

  I was the number one bookmaker in my section prior to the NJPC. In no time at all my guaranteed right to go to work was withdrawn on at least 100 days a year The self same bookmakers who reduced the number of bookmaker's pitches on a daily basis are by and large the same people who are now expecting me to support them in case the same thing should happen to them.

  Don't do to others what you would not want done to yourself!

  A variety of methods were used to determine the NJPC lists in the Southern area, for example:

David Ovetton away Positions based on inherited and or personal starting dates
Harry Murrall awayPositions based on highest position achieved, either inherited or personal (the continuity of starting dates was not available)
Young Maynard awayPositions were neither based on starting dates or highest position achieved.
Victoria Blower railsPositions based on Southern BPA pitch numbers.


  For each away bookie it was the worst case scenario, for the rails bookie, with a 1993 start date he won the jackpot.

  On the same subject it is clear that all positions were meant to be based upon staring dates which despite the statements from the NJPC were in fact freely available.

  William Hills and Ladbrokes were major losers. Had their positions been based on the company start dates rather than the "method" used then both would have been far better off. Hills in particular.

  Before any new admin is put in place the anomalies created by the NJPC should be put right.

  The NJPC has been misleading MPs, judges, solicitors and the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

  Myself, another southern area bookmaker and a Welsh area bookmaker all appealed independently to the Ombudsman. Each of us complained regarding our individual treatment by the NJPC.

  Since each of us was treated differently when replying to the Ombudsman the NJPC must have given a totally different explanation for each of us.

  Later the NJPC wrote to Iain Duncan Smith and implied that it had used only one method for the South and Welsh areas.

  My grandfather used to say that liars need good memories.

  As for the NJPC and it's finances, when it was overcharging bookmakers through the auction system it accumulated a lot of spare cash, the vast majority of this from Tatts bookmakers, It then came up with an ingenious scheme, it spent £1.4 million on rails joints so each rails bookmaker had a joint on each race course and did not have to have the inconvenience of transporting their equipment from track to track like the rest of us.

  This meant that a rails bookmaker with 15 track positions had in effect 15 joints.

  To recoup its investment the NJPC charged £15 + VAT daily rental per joint. This has now been reduced to £10 + VAT and the proposal now is to reduce it to £5. Its income from the rental so far is about £585,000, I do not know if this figure includes the VAT.

  This means that the NJPC is losing about £800,000 plus interest on this scheme. Obviously the value of this "investment" has been greatly devalued by reducing the income. Rounding up the income to £100,000 per annum this produced about £2000 a week towards the running of the NJPC. Without this income the proposal now is to double the daily charge to bookmakers to finance the future company.

  The chairman and two independent members of the NJPC are appointed by the Levy Board. If this is an example of how to run a business it's no wonder that the Levy Board keeps having a shortfall of cash.

October 2007





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2008
Prepared 23 January 2008