A white Porsche, $80k in cash and an invite for a beer: Why a bookie thought he couldn’t lose
When bookmaker David McLauchlan met client Allen Ng in a northern suburb car park to collect an $80,000 gambling debt, he did not foresee that he was the one who would end up the biggest loser in a Supreme Court case.
He did not suspect that Ng would become a client who stopped honouring his bets. After all, the punter had arrived at their meeting in Airport West, driving a shiny white Porsche before handing over a bag containing the $80,000 in cash and suggesting they go for a beer.
Bookmaker David McLauchlan fields at Melbourne meetings on Wednesdays and Saturdays.Credit: Getty Images: Vince Caligiuri
“It’s only your own money that you’re getting back,” he said to McLauchlan with a laugh, having won more than $100,000 from the bookmaker across the previous month.
“He was pretty jovial, he didn’t act like a problem gambler. He acted like a fellow who had a stack of money, and you win some, you lose some,” McLauchlan said of their early interactions.
Their next meeting was not so jovial. Ng had lost another $152,000 to the bookmaker on credit across three horrid days, including one Saturday afternoon during which he placed 16 bets ranging between $1000 and $20,000 – all but one of them losers.
But when it came time to settle, he handed over only $2000, saying he needed more time. In the end, he never had to pay.
After eight months and a series of unanswered text messages, McLauchlan took Ng to the County Court to recoup his losses. Judge Douglas Trapnell ruled in the bookmaker’s favour. He ordered Ng pay the $150,000 and court costs.
But this is when the bookmaker’s own luck turned bad.
Ng appealed against the decision to the Supreme Court, claiming the bets were null and void because he had never been asked to sign a bookmaker client account form by McLauchlan, as required at the time by the telephone betting rules.
Melbourne businessman Allen NgCredit: Source: clarkofthecourse.com
Three judges of the Supreme Court – Justices Maree Kennedy, Cameron Macauley and Kevin Lyons – upheld the appeal.
They classed the bets as “unauthorised gambling” because the form had not been signed nor registered with Racing Victoria. As a result, the $150,000 debt was wiped.
Let’s bet
A fortnight after the Supreme Court finding, McLauchlan spoke to this masthead about the case. Sitting in his South Melbourne apartment, he shook his head in disbelief. Until then, he felt he had done everything right – from the moment he was introduced to Ng at a midweek meeting at Sandown Racecourse on February 8, 2020, by a mutual friend.
“This fellow wanted to bet with somebody on credit, who would accept his reasonably large wagers,” McLauchlan said of their introduction.
The bookmaker said he registered Ng’s name, address, banking details, email address and mobile phone number with Racing Victoria to obtain a code that would allow them to open a credit betting account.
Three weeks later, he took a photo of Ng’s driver’s licence so that he could register the punter’s date of birth with Racing Victoria. At all times, Racing Victoria could access their betting records and for this reason, McLauchlan believed their transactions were legal.
From the time they met, Ng laid more than 270 bets over 10 weeks. At first, he was a “prolific winner”. Across certain days, the punter won $7000, $8000, $9000 and $22,000. He would always ask for a closing balance and the bookmaker would always pay.
They traded texts back and forth. The betting was tense, but the banter was friendly.
“You’re a genius,” McLauchlan would say after Ng’s wins.
They even traded pictures. McLauchlan shared a picture of a glass of wine from his farm, while Ng sent the bookmaker a shot of his home office, a “sophisticated” set-up that had five computer screens and two TVs so he could monitor the races.
“That to me is pretty professional,” McLauchlan said. “I said to him, ‘You’re more organised than I am’.”
Day from hell
The turning point came at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. While Victoria went into lockdown for 43 days from March 31, 2020, the racing industry was given a reprieve and allowed to continue.
Races were run, and Ng continued to bet. Saturday, April 18, 2020, was his darkest day.
McLauchlan’s records show that Ng placed 16 bets at Randwick, Caulfield and Morphettville. He lost $134,000 and by the end of that day, he owed McLauchlan $152,000.
The killer blow was a $16,500 bet on Phaistos to win the last race at Randwick at $5 for an $82,500 return. Ridden by Kerrin McEvoy, Phaistos looked home before losing in an agonising photo finish.
Ng’s bets included $20,000 on Bivouac to win the All Aged Stakes at Randwick at $3.80 (the sprinter, ridden by Hugh Bowman, finished fifth of 14), $10,000 each way on Mahamedeis at Caulfield at top fluctuation of on-course bookmakers (the gelding finished ninth of 13), a bet of $15,000 on Dr Drill to win the last race at Randwick (which finished 11th of 14 under Tom Marquand), a bet of $10,000 on Mr Quickie at Caulfield (which started $1.90 favourite and finished second). He also had seven bets of $10,000.
Time to settle
“He asked me to come around to his factory … he owned a factory, and he had his office upstairs,” McLauchlan said.
“It was something to do with cabinet making or shopfitting or something like that. So he made me a cup of Chinese tea and said, ‘Look, here’s two grand, I just need time to get the rest.’ I said, ‘That’s fine.’ And then time went on and on and on.”
McLauchlan said an associate of Ng approached him about settlement payments, but it was never followed through. In the end, the bookmaker felt obliged to act.
In February, the following year, McLauchlan sent Ng a message, notifying him of legal action: “Dear Allen, As from Monday, my solicitor AMS Law will be instructed to recover your debt. I’ve made contact with Racing Victoria officials, and they are waiting for AMS Law’s instructions.”
The aftermath
Unauthorised gambling is illegal – an offence punishable by a maximum fine of $165,220 and/or two years’ jail. So, what McLauchlan can’t understand is how Racing Victoria allowed the betting to continue across more than two months if what he and Ng were doing was against the law.
“If I was guilty of not getting this fellow’s signature, but they [Racing Victoria] ask who he is and get his driver’s licence, and they see him turning over so much money, why didn’t they stand me down and fine me, or give me a warning?” he said.
“They just let it go on. Whilst I was losing, everybody’s happy.”
Racing Victoria declined to comment.
But in a decision that came too late for McLauchlan, the rule to obtain a signed and completed written authority before accepting telephone bets was removed in 2023.
McLauchlan said he was not asking people to feel sorry for him because “he’s done all his money”.
“But it’s wrong that a fellow can win a hundred million off you, and if he does twenty grand, he doesn’t have to pay. It’s odds to nothing. It can’t be all one way,” he said.
“It’s not going to ruin me, no. But it’s just, firstly, you don’t like to be made a fool of. That’s No.1. And it sort of sours you. I think this fellow – not that I need to be taught a lesson – but has changed my trust in people that you haven’t had long-term relationships with. Which is a pity.”
When contacted by this masthead, Ng said the Supreme Court decision was “all about the law at the end of the day”.
“You had three Supreme Court judges that looked at the law, and at the end of the day, the law won,” Ng said.
Ng said he did not want to go back over the evidence that had been presented in the County Court because “I have been through that ordeal already”.
He said he had made approaches to McLauchlan after April 18, 2020, that were “fobbed off” and when the bookmaker pushed the matter to court, “he made it difficult”.
He said the bookmaker had done the wrong thing, and the case had cost him a lot of money.
“It is a matter of principle,” Ng said. “Look at the rules, and the rules say he didn’t do the right thing by me. Not just by me, but I think you should be looking at other punters who are in the same situation that I am.
“Shouldn’t that be the obligation of the bookmaker? And the authorities? To ensure that things are done correctly?”
When asked if he was still having a bet, Ng said: “It’s irrelevant”.
In 2023, the state government supported a recommendation for the transfer and consolidation of all licensing, monitoring and enforcement of bookmakers from racing authorities to the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission.
News, results and expert analysis from the weekend of sport are sent every Monday. Sign up for our Sport newsletter.