A Dallas County, Iowa, resident has sued sports betting giant DraftKings and its subsidiary, Crown IA Gaming, for allegedly refusing to pay $14.2 million he claims he won.

DraftKings, one of America’s two largest sports betting operators, voided Nicholas Bavas’ winnings due to "internal errors." The company said it maintains the right to refuse winning payments caused by errors, which the company said Bavas agreed to when he accepted their terms and conditions.

DraftKings is licensed to operate in Iowa by the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission. It first launched in the state in February 2020.

What spurred the lawsuit?

According to Bavas, DraftKings is denying payments related to the 2024 AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am golf tournament.

The tournament was placed in jeopardy after 54 holes, or three of four rounds of play, due to impending rain. Bavas and other DraftKings users threw large sums of money behind the then-leaders, aware that the fourth round could be canceled due to Mother Nature. DraftKings accepted the wagers.

Bavas made several wagers on Feb. 3, 2024, including a $100 “20 Picks” parlay bet, which required users to pick the correct finishing order of competitors. Bavas placed his selections, which matched competitors to their current standing in the tournament, with a possible payout of $4.7 million.

Later that evening, he wagered $25 to win $250,068 on a separate parlay that required him to select the correct top 20 finishers in no particular order. He also placed two $50 and one $100 bet identical to his first wager for payouts of $2.3 million (twice) and $4.7 million.

The fourth round ended up being canceled, and winners were announced after 54 holes. Wyndham Clark, currently 27th in the PGA Tour’s world golf rankings, was declared the winner, and all of Bavas’ 20 selections lined up with the final results.

He stood to gain $14.2 million.

Clearly defined rules?

According to Bavas’ lawsuit, DraftKings “unilaterally voided” all of his bets and refunded the amount he had risked. The company cited a rule that said that bets placed after the final shot of an event that does not continue will be voided.

“[Bavas] knowingly accepted the risk that circumstances may arise related to the odds associated with any wager.”

The plaintiff said that DraftKings’ rules do not apply to him since he placed wagers on multiple players.

His attorneys noted that he bet on other golfers to win the events and alleged that DraftKings wouldn’t have refunded him his losses for those losing wagers. The lawsuit also accused the sports betting giant of using deliberately vague rules to work in their favor.

“[DraftKings used a] dizzying array of interlocking sets of rules that may or may not govern each bet depending on the type of wager placed, the specific event, and the particular sport. However, when DraftKings makes an error or accepts a bet it should not have, or when unforeseen events occur that require an unanticipated large payout by DraftKings, then it seems different rules apply.”

Several online users shared frustration consistent with that expressed by Bavas when DraftKings announced on social media that it had voided all bets placed after the third round.