Man changes his mind about suing Washington Lottery

Sep 2, 2013, 7:41 am (10 comments)

Washington Lottery

The Kennewick, Washington, man says he has decided to back off plans to sue the Washington State Lottery Commission over a misleading scratch card game.

Ken Goldsmith raised objections with state lottery officials in June claiming the Red Hot 5s scratch card was misleading, giving many ticket holders, including himself, the impression they had won the $55,555 grand prize.

(See Washington man to fight state lottery; says new scratch card 'misleading', Lottery Post, June 17, 2013.)

After news broke of the dispute, Goldsmith said he received plenty of offers from attorneys across the state to handle a class action lawsuit under the Consumer Protection Act, but none would take his case on a contingency basis.

In the meantime, the lottery commission killed the game.

"It was never my intent to give the lottery a bad rap," Goldsmith said. "I brought to their attention a problem because I felt the game was flawed. Their first response was that it would be too costly to pull the game, but after the Herald story ran, they did pull it.

"But I still think they should at least issue another $5 scratch ticket to those of us who thought we had a winning ticket," he said.

But that isn't going to happen, said Arlen Harris, a lottery spokesman.

"We are bound by state law not to reimburse a lottery ticket," Harris said. "The (law) would need to be changed first."

But, he added, the public can request that the law be changed by appealing the issue to the commission.

Confusion about the Red Hot 5s tickets came from a lack of directions on the card, which didn't explain that the numbers on the back were for a totally different game than the ones on the front of the card.

Once Goldsmith's story appeared in the Herald, he heard from almost two dozen people across the state, including Glenn Jetton of Kennewick, who also thought they had won the grand prize on the Red Hot 5s scratch card.

"I do feel the lottery should take some kind of responsibility for that card," Jetton said. "And I agree with Ken that they should at least replace the card."

Barbara Johnson of Kennewick also had what she thought was a winning ticket. And though she understood Goldsmith's concern, she was more pragmatic.

"I'm a gambler, and when you gamble, you win some and you lose some," she said. "Sure, it would be nice if the lottery folks would at least reimburse the $5 ticket, but I'm not going to worry about it."

As for Goldsmith, he's done worrying about it.

"I took a lot of flak from people who thought I was being a sore loser," he said. "But the bigger picture is this: I believe I made my point in proving that this was a flawed game. And maybe because I raised the issue with them publicly it made a difference because they did the right thing and pulled the ticket even though they initially said they wouldn't. End of story."

News Tribune

Comments

Abdi's avatarAbdi

In my opinion this old boy might have just done the greates mistake in his life.why? this is an opportunity to claim $ 1M in compensation for violation of lottery rules.many are the times that these lottery states collect millions of dollars in profit and they wouldn't have minded giving back just $ 1M.

I am really obtimistic that many comments to follow will echo the same.

mypiemaster's avatarmypiemaster

Quote: Originally posted by Abdi on Sep 2, 2013

In my opinion this old boy might have just done the greates mistake in his life.why? this is an opportunity to claim $ 1M in compensation for violation of lottery rules.many are the times that these lottery states collect millions of dollars in profit and they wouldn't have minded giving back just $ 1M.

I am really obtimistic that many comments to follow will echo the same.

I don't recall anybody, ever winning, any substantial amount from the lotteries, through litigation ever. The little guy always seems to get the shaft.  It's good to be the king/queen.

Artist77's avatarArtist77

It was a weak case since no one wanted to take it on a contingency. Spending several hundred thousand to litigate would not have been wise. And the little guy does tend to lose 999 times out of 1000. I am not saying it is fair, but sometimes it is better to just move forward.

RJOh's avatarRJOh

He dropped the case for one reason only....

"but none would take his case on a contingency basis."

There was no reason for him to pay all that money out because  he lost on a $5 lottery ticket.

Jon D's avatarJon D

Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Sep 2, 2013

He dropped the case for one reason only....

"but none would take his case on a contingency basis."

There was no reason for him to pay all that money out because  he lost on a $5 lottery ticket.

he received plenty of offers from attorneys across the state to handle a class action lawsuit

And yet there was no shortage of ambulance chasers ready to take his money on a certain losing case. Which is why I like my previous solution.

Artist77's avatarArtist77

Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Sep 2, 2013

He dropped the case for one reason only....

"but none would take his case on a contingency basis."

There was no reason for him to pay all that money out because  he lost on a $5 lottery ticket.

Amen.

pickone4me's avatarpickone4me

Face palm on this one!  Those scratch offs seem to be purposely confusing,  which is why I don't play scratch offs.  This dude needs to take advanatage of this.

RedStang's avatarRedStang

This guy is a .  How do you think the numbers on the back should match the front.

sully16's avatarsully16

lol, nice graphics

jamella724

The state should be very careful with the games that they provide to the public. It should be for the people and not to take advantage of them. For sure they don't want the people to lose trust on the lottery.

End of comments
Subscribe to this news story