Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 8, 2016, 10:44 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Massachusetts Judge Denies Demand for Lump-Sum Lottery Prize Payment

Topic closed. 20 replies. Last post 12 years ago by CASH Only.

Page 2 of 2
PrintE-mailLink
hgabel's avatar - motomedia motclub.com
Ontario
Canada
Member #8264
October 30, 2004
30 Posts
Offline
Posted: December 31, 2004, 10:37 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Lee123 on December 31, 2004







Keeping the 7% is all right but what you dont know she is 94 years old







We DO know she is 94 years old - it's stated in an earlier story!

MOST states have the same rule about their lottery jackpots - and they're clearly spelled out. As I said before, if the lottery commissions started making exceptions, you're gonna get chaos.

And I do believe the rules are actually a legal thing - ie. can't be arbitarily changed. We're talking legally binding document.

Instead of kicking up all this fuss and bother, get the money via a third party and get it over and done with.

    hgabel's avatar - motomedia motclub.com
    Ontario
    Canada
    Member #8264
    October 30, 2004
    30 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: January 1, 2005, 12:53 am - IP Logged

    Er.....feelin' a little silly here!!! Happens when you reread things, sometimes...!!

    $5.6 million dollars?!?!? That's chicken feed in the lottery world! And here in Canada (I believe Blighty, too) that money would all be paid out. In fact, our lotteries all pay a lump sum - untaxed, too! Mind you, ya gotta pay tax once ya start earning interest, but that's a given.

    Still say, it's a legal thing. But the legal thing needs to be changed! If it can be done here, it can be done in the hoo-hess-hay!

    $5.6 mill-yun over 20 years?! Give to me the break!!

     = that situation!

      Maverick's avatar - yinyang
      USA
      United States
      Member #8242
      October 29, 2004
      1133 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: January 1, 2005, 1:05 am - IP Logged
      Quote: Originally posted by hgabel on December 30, 2004


      The rules were clear and if lottery commissions start making exceptions, you're gonna get chaos.



      That's true. As much as I want to see her get a cash option decision from the judge, cos she's 94, rules are not made to be broken, except for the majority.

      It's a known thing to have another person (adult) claim your winning ticket "for you", for this reason we see before us (if this game had a cash option), and for other reasons.

        urbossmanpimpin's avatar - batman49
        Dallas, Texas
        United States
        Member #7272
        September 28, 2004
        179 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: January 2, 2005, 4:00 am - IP Logged

        can't she sell the annuity to one of those companies for a cash settlement?

          Avatar
          Roslindale, MA
          United States
          Member #5377
          July 1, 2004
          135 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: January 2, 2005, 7:29 am - IP Logged

          It's unlikely the amount of cash she'd get from a third party would be as much as she would have received had she been able to take a lump sum in the first place.



          And that's assuming the third party is on the up-and-up (I have my doubts about some of these companies that advertise their services on TV - I'd put them about a half a cut above the shysters who peddle fortune-making secrets on late night infomercials).


            United States
            Member #379
            June 5, 2002
            11296 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: January 21, 2005, 4:27 pm - IP Logged

            We simply need more people to boycott Megais bad$ until there is a cash option.