I don't think so, because the ticket was printed before the drawing.  The store would be responsible for reimbursing the lottery commission for that ticket whether they actually sold it or not. Since the LC was/will be/requires that they be paid for the ticket, they have to honor it's validity.

That makes sense. So no matter if it was legal to make clerks pay for mistaken lotto tickets (the store has lost grounds here by their policy) or if the clerk bought the ticket, it seems to me the clerk should be the one who is the proper owner now.

There are two clerks involved, too.  One who made the mistake (according to the customer) and would have been responsible to pay for it, and the one who saw it was a winner, bought it, and offered the manager half.  What a mess!  I'm surprised the customer hasn't thrown his/her lawyer into the frey with some off-the-wall claim.

As far as i know you cant buy a powerball ticket and exchange it. When the person took the ticket back from the customer it belonged to the store. If Someone paid for the ticket it's theres.

Since all tickets sales are the responsibility of the store. It should be the stores money. When the cashier bought the ticket the next day technically it belongs to the clerk. case closed.

LuckyLilly....the customer (or one who claims to be) has come forward.  His story is that he asked for a $20 quick pick.  Instead he got a $10 quick pick with a $10 Powerplay.  He refused that ticket, hence the error ticket. 

To make it more interesting the customer says later that day he went back to the store and asked for the orginal ticket (what we now know is the wining ticket) and got another ticket instead.

The saga continues. 

Holy cow!  Has the customer filed a claim yet?  I can't find anything about it at the tv station websites.

Do you think that the store's policy, irregardless if it is legal or not, forfeits the rights of the store to claim the ticket?

LuckyLilly...check out the web site for the Idaho Statesmen.  There is an article there that sums up the situation to date.

Yes.  Especially if that policy has ever been enforced, which I bet it has.  Maverik does not have the right to make employees reimburse the store for losing tickets, but take the jackpot of winning tickets.

Thanks CA LotteryGuy, I found it now.  I always forget about the paper. 

That article says Maverik has eaten the financial loss in the past on tickets that were printed wrongly, so it's possible their official policy wasn't enforced.  Darn it,  I sure hope Maverik doesn't prevail on this one. 

I think that what the store's policy says or doesn't say about what happens with unsold tickets may be the deciding factor in the case.  Once it was refused by the customer the ticket became merchandise that was owned by the store, and it's a safe assumption that the store wanted to sell that piece of merchandise. If the policy contains a clause that would prohibit the ticket from being bought by an employee then the ticket wasn't for sale and therefore probably belongs to the store.  If the policy doesn't prohibit employees from buying unsold tickets then the ticket may have been legally purchased and would therefore belong to the buyer. A policy that attempts to make employees financially responsible for tickets may result in a court finding that the store had no intention of becoming the owner of any unsold tickets.

Stores sell things for  the wrong price all the time.  If they notice before the sale is complete they generally have the right to refuse the sale. Once the sale is completed they have no recourse. Of course there's the possibility that the court will rule that the employee knew the store would not want to sell such a valuable piece of merchandise so cheaply, and that the clerk therefore acted improperly. In that case, if the clerk had sold it to some random customer the store's only recourse would probably be disciplinary action against the clerk. Since the clerk sold the ticket to themself the court may deem the sale fraudulent. Offering to split the winnings with the manager suggests that the clerk knew they may have been acting improperly and was attempting to get approval from a superior.

The part of the policy that tries to make employees responsible is illegal and unenforceable regardless of what they may have tried to do in the past.  If an employee steals they can obviously be fired, criminally prosecuted, and possibly forced to make restitution. If an employee screws up, whether it's making the wrong sandwich for a customer at the deli counter, dropping a $1000 bottle of cognac at a liquor store, or printing a lottery ticket that's not what the customer asked for, the only recourse the employer has is disciplinary action or termination.  In this case it's unclear why the customer refused the ticket, so we don't even know if the clerk that printed the ticket screwed up. Maybe the customer got what they asked for and didn't like the numbers on the ticket. Since the store had no right to make the clerk who printed the ticket buy it and that clerk (presumably) made no attempt to buy it that clerk has no basis for a claim on the ticket.

Of course I'm absolutely shocked and amazed that the original customer has come forward to try and stake their claim.  Assuming the customer originally refused the ticket they should be SOL. Even if they came back later a store is generally under no obligation to sell somebody any particular piece of merchandise. Of course it's possible that the customer actually wanted the ticket but discovered after "ordering it" that they didn't have the $20 it cost. I put "ordering it" in quotes because there's a reasonable argument that an online lottery ticket is custom ordered merchandise that the customer is obligated to pay for.  If that's the case they may have a legitimate claim, because there's a good argument that they owned the ticket and simply had to arrange for payment.

thx for the update........its funny cus sometimes I will ask the store if they have any tkt's ppl didn't pay for and I always buy them.....it doesn't happen often but i do ask.