Canada couple loses out on $1.64M jackpot

Seeing how the paying pool members will only get $952K after not splitting with the Clancys who expected to get $1.65M, they must have been expecting to get two shares as if they both had paid into the pool.   That seems both stupid and greedy if neither was contributing to the pool.

It was nice but certainly not necessary for the guy who gave them $100,000 to do that. I wonder if that decision was made after a few court

dates or when the guy got his check. I only say that because I'm just wondering about the level of entitlement the couple felt and how many of

the other players they approached with the same plan and at what point.

Obviously they filed the suit but really, deep down, I wonder if they ever felt that since they didn't play or pay that day they weren't honestly entitled

to a split of the pot? And after receiving $100,000 I guess the sense of entitlement or assumption to split grew out of control...if one did, maybe more

would.

I don't know why people think that if they are a contributing member one week $$$ that they still are a contributing member the next $0.00

The 'I'll cover for you' doesn't quite cut it after awhile and with most people doesn't ever cut it when it's time to collect a few hundred thousand

dollars or more.

Some people get some funny ideas about what they are entitled to after having participated in a lottery pool.  I remember some years ago a group of Cleveland factory workers won the Ohio lottery and even though every one contributed the same amount some of the older members thought the younger members should give half their share to the older members to make up for what they lost playing before they joined. They younger members had to go to court to an equal share of the winnings.  The Clancys not only thought their friends should have covered them but covered them for twice the amount that any of the paying pool members would get.

Seems like Canada has more than their share of trouble with lottery pools for some reason.

Seems like there's always some controversy and trouble getting your money if you win.

Strange.

That's what happens when peoples who can't prove they ever brought a ticket are allowed to file a claim for the winnings.

I agree with Ridgerunner regarding this particular case. I run a few lottery pools. My rule is, you don't pay,you don't play. But I would like to share an expeierence regarding one of my pools. One of my loyal players had a heart attack and was out of work briefly. Myself and another player covered him. When he got back on his feet he paid us back.

That's the way it works with good people with compassion, integrity, principles and values, Nick.

But it seems when it comes to money, those traits go out the window many times in today's world.

This "if it feels good, do it" lifestyle that the libs have foisted upon us over the last 50 years is eating at the fabric and backbone of this country like a cancer.

A man's word used to be his bond. Not any more.

Now it doesn't mean anything to anybody who grew up under the agenda of today's educators and today's news media and now, even the Executive Branch.

This country has undergone the greatest brainwashing in the history of the world to turn us into something only the nutty few wanted years ago. They've done it by drumming the views of the nutty few into the minds of our children through liberal education and slanted, biased news reporting. If that's all they're ever exposed to, that's what they'll believe.

If we don't stop them in 2012, I don't think we ever will.

I still believe that there are a lot of good people in this country though.

In your case the group had a fixed membership and the player planned to return as soon as his health permitted.

However as was pointed out in this story and others when the Clancys joined the pool four years earlier they made an agreement with a core(fixed) group of six players one who had since moved on as had the Clancys with no plans of returning.   The group that won the jackpot consisted of 21 players of which sixteen had never agreed to pay for the Clancys who weren't even in the group then.  This group was determined by who contributed money to buy tickets as are many pools that pop up when the lottery jackpots get large.

This is why I dislike lottery pools. I'm in a pool with my wife and that's it.

Matthew Hayduk, an Edmonton man had go to court before getting his $33 million lottery jackpot and he wasn't in a pool.  It seems in Canada anyone can file a claim for the lottery jackpot even if they had no part in buying the winning ticket.

http://www.lotterypost.com/news/233181

"a mans word is his bond" heard it a million times growing up. now if you say it for whatever reason the other party says OK let's get the legal paperwork squared away. like you did't even say it.

Quite a number of false claims were filed recently here in Canada which makes it even more important to stay out of pools.

I smell little mario the moron with a new twist.

Hmmm...

Hmmm...