[Lacan212]

Hypothetically, these could be two potentials actions:

1. His image
I have never used a "bookie", but I would imagine that they run on some sort of creditability. A "bookie" is selling a product, if his product is bad, people won't buy it. If people know if that he is an individual that does not pay, then he should not get any customers. Again, due to the nature of his business, I am not really sure how one could possibly inform other customers.

2. Tell the authorities
The obvious problem with this solution is that the consumer will not get his/her money back (RICO = asset forfeiture, similar to drug trafficking cases) and he/she could possibly face legal action. In fact, I would think that the only reason someone would resort to this is a nuclear option. One could possibly tell the authorities that they have knowledge of a "big time bookie", but that they would not testify without immunity (In theory, they could not compel him/her to testify due to 5th amendment right against self-incrimination, if they force him/her to testify, then they would have to grant him/her immunity from prosecution).


Option 1 appears to the only course of action that could result in the individual getting some of their money. Option 2 is only for revenge/justice. Illegal transactions are out of the bounds of legitimacy (/Ontology), so obviously there are no legal tools to assist consumers with this. Option 1 could seen as consumers attempting to reason with "the bookie" that he needs to run a more sound business or else he will lose customers. Option 2 is more of a "game of brinkmanship."

Also, isn't is possible for bookies to run bad if they are not taking even sided action? Legitimate books can take short-time hits, I doubt a more small time bookie could. What if he simply doesn't have the money or is possibly just running a scam?

Sorry for your situation and GL.


Option 3: "Surprise Witnesses. Each one more surprising than the last. I tell you, the judge won't know what hit him."