New Jersey May Not Void DraftKings’ Bets Accepted on Incorrect Totals

• DraftKings has filed an incident report with the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement 
• DraftKings hopes to void bets taken on an Oct. 24 Lakers and Nuggets matchup that featured incorrect game totals
• The New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement typically does not void bets taken on “obvious errors.”

DraftKings may be on the hook for bets it took in New Jersey on an NBA game that featured totals with “obvious errors.”

The sports betting company has filed an incident report with the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (NJ DGE) to void bets taken on an NBA matchup last month after the operator identified that incorrect same game parlay totals had been used for the game.

DraftKings posted incorrect game totals for numerous players in the Oct. 24 matchup between the Los Angeles Lakers and Denver Nuggets. The incorrect totals were live for 13 minutes in DraftKings’ sports betting markets throughout the country.

NJ Does Not Void Bets Taken Despite ‘Obvious Errors’

DraftKings has requested the bets be voided in each market where it accepted the wagers.

Jake List, Senior Director of Regulatory Operations for DraftKings, reported last week to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission that a miscommunication from the the company’s third-party SGP vendor, Sportcast, led to the national mistake. In Massachusetts, 178 bets were placed by 137 customers, with users taking advantage to the tune of more than $575,000 in winnings in the commonwealth.

DraftKings representatives informed Sportcast it could not translate first-quarter SGP markets for the game. Sportcast, however, still sent the first-quarter SGP markets over to the sports betting operator and they were incorrectly identified on the platform as full-game markets.

For example, LeBron James’s full-game over/under totals were listed as 8.5 points, 2.5 rebounds, and 6.5 assists. Those over/under totals should have been listed as first-quarter totals. Incorrect totals were listed for a number of athletes involved in the matchup, not just James.

List noted during the Massachusetts hearing that the majority of states where DraftKings accepted these wagers have allowed the company to void the bets.

It is unknown how many bets were taken in New Jersey. However, a NJ DGE spokesperson told Sports Betting Dime that DraftKings has filed an incident report with the division to void the bets.

According to the spokesperson, however, New Jersey typically makes operators pay out bets even if they were accepted with an “obvious error.”

“Pursuant to N.J.A.C. 13:69N-1.11(d), an operator may not void a bet without the permission of the Division of Gaming Enforcement (DGE). DGE practice is that when an operator accepts a legal bet, it is obligated to pay out winning bets, even if it accepted the bet at odds that it deems an ‘obvious error.'” the spokesperson said.

All bets are “suspended” until the DGE finalizes its investigation.

No details were provided on a timeline for the investigation or the potential winnings DraftKings may have to pay out to New Jersey bettors.

National Problem for DraftKings

According to ESPN’s David Payne Purdum on X, DraftKings was allowed to void bets on this matchup in Colorado, Indiana, and New York. Massachusetts and Pennsylvania sports betting regulators are currently considering the company’s request to void the wagers.

NY, Colorado and Indiana are among states that allowed DraftKings to void bets placed on the erroneous NBA odds. Illinois, Penn and Mass are reviewing it.

Extrapolating from the amounts reported in Mass and Colorado, millions of dollars in potential winnings were at stake.

— David Payne Purdum (@DavidPurdum) November 17, 2023

As Purdum also reported, Connecticut regulators have been the only regulator to require DraftKings to pay out the bets, as the company was on the hook for more than $180,000

The sports betting company may find the same scenario play out in the Garden State. The operator will not be able to request a void simply because the bets were accepted on totals that featured an “obvious error.” List mentioned this as a number of times during the Massachusetts hearing as the main reason the bets should be voided.

“This is a truly exceptional circumstance. I believe these type of regulations exist for truly exceptional circumstances. It does make sense for operators to have some type of protection for this scenario. This circumstance did not only effect Massachusetts,” he said during the hearing.

The Massachusetts hearing will be completed on Thursday, Nov. 30.