A Howland, Ohio couple who won $250,000 playing Mega Millions discovered the hard way that money can come between friends.
Michael Salcone and his wife, Theresa, of Gretchen Drive have been sued by 10 of Michael Salcone's former breakfast friends at the Elm Road McDonald's after a dispute arose over whose money bought a winning lottery ticket.
"I'm just astounded," Theresa Salcone said Wednesday when she learned of the suit, filed in Trumbull County Common Pleas Court.
According to the filing, the 11 men had been meeting for breakfast almost daily for the past three years. In August, they agreed to put $5 each into a pool to play the Mega Million lottery game on Fridays.
Michael Salcone agreed to collect the money and buy the tickets, the suit says. On Oct. 7, one of the tickets Salcone bought contained five of six winning numbers, yielding a prize of $250,000, but he didn't tell the group about it, the suit says.
Rumor has it
Around the first week of November, some of the members heard a rumor that Salcone had hit the lottery and asked him whether it was true, the suit says. Salcone said no and acted surprised by the rumor, it adds.
When some of the group members saw a sign a few days later indicating that the Giant Eagle on Elm Road had sold a $250,000 winning ticket, they asked and were told the winner was Salcone, the suit says. Salcone then indicated the winner was his wife — but she played the game on a Tuesday, not a Friday, it says.
Theresa Salcone said the complaint is baseless because her husband always showed the tickets to the other men every Saturday morning, and the men knew just how many tickets they bought, she said.
"He would take them and they checked them all together," she said. "Sometimes he would just say 'You check them.'"
The 10 men listed as plaintiffs are Ronald L. LeMaster, Raymond C. McLean, Kenneth B. Ulrich, Robert Holmes Jr., Steve E. Mrofchak, Joseph Celedonia, Donald C. Hoyle, Philip M. Sidoti and Joseph M. Sidoti, all of Warren; and Robert Cebula of Burghill.
Commission findings
The Ohio Lottery Commission confirmed that the ticket was part of a block of tickets — and it had not been bought separately as Salcone had told the group, the suit says.
The Ohio Lottery Commission, contacted by telephone Wednesday afternoon, said the winning ticket had not yet been claimed. The commission said it must be claimed within 180 days after the drawing, or it will be forfeited.
The suit asks for a preliminary injunction restraining the Salcones from transferring, concealing or destroying any of their property and stopping five banks and a credit union from releasing any funds to the Salcones.
It asks for a judgment of $350,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages and a finding that the Salcones not get any share of the winnings. The case is assigned to Judge Andrew Logan.
The suit says Salcone no longer joins the others for breakfast, and showed up for the last time in early December.
Lottery pools do not increase your chances of winning big games like Powerball or Mega Millions all that much, and commonly introduce problems if you win.
"It(the suit) asks for a judgment of $350,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages and a finding that the Salcones not get any share of the winnings. The case is assigned to Judge Andrew Logan."
That's a new twist, take a $250,000 ticket and get suited for $450,000. It's like real estate, buy a $250,000 house and 2 months later, it worth $450,000.
This is crazy....this is beginning to happen daily. I imagine if one of my friends wins a $300 million jackpot, I am going to sue them for over $500 million. Seems just, doesn't it?
"The suit asks for a preliminary injunction restraining the Salcones from transferring, concealing or destroying any of their property and stopping five banks and a credit union from releasing any funds to the Salcones."
Lottery pools do not increase your chances of winning big games like Powerball or Mega Millions all that much, and commonly introduce problems if you win.
"It(the suit) asks for a judgment of $350,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages and a finding that the Salcones not get any share of the winnings. The case is assigned to Judge Andrew Logan."
That's a new twist, take a $250,000 ticket and get suited for $450,000. It's like real estate, buy a $250,000 house and 2 months later, it worth $450,000.
This guy is a liar and a thief stealing from honest friends that put their trust in him. If they get this kind of judgement against him then he gets what he deserves. I'm sure the lawyer they get to represent their case will more than make up for the difference in the settlement.
When some of the group members saw a sign a few days later indicating that the Giant Eagle on Elm Road had sold a $250,000 winning ticket, they asked and were told the winner was Salcone, the suit says. Salcone then indicated the winner was his wife — but she played the game on a Tuesday, not a Friday, it says. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Here is the opposite side of the argument of why your name has to be made public if you win.....If this guy did what he did,,,he should probably want to cut a deal before this gets to court......He just blew at minimum $27,500 and a maximum of $250,000, not to mention he lost 10 friends and most of his wife's respect (unless she talked him into it.)....
He is a sneak and a thief. He should have known that they would find out..it is sad that many people seem to display a lack of honesty and morals when it comes to money. Makes me wonder if that is a commonplace thing in his life...lying and stealing. I wonder how his bosses look at him now.
May be this guy is not a thief and his buddies are jealous of his win and trying to make his life miserable. There are many who would like/work to make your life like hell if they remain miserable/poor and you suddenly become rich. If you are in a pool and even if someone else other than you bought the pool's ticket and by your good luck you won on your own ticket. The remaining memebers can lie against you and say that you bought the ticket and you may not have any thing to defend yourself unless there is some documentary evidence.
Usually it is the odd man out complaining, this time it appears the ticket buyer was the scum. It never fails, the pack animal mentality of humans is doomed from the beginning. Learn to stand on your own two feet and you won't have to worry about friends cheating you. I met a lot of guys in the Army I would trust my life with, but I wouldn't trust the guy across the street with my dirty laundry.
The lesson is, as usual, if you are in a lottery pool don't pretend a ticket you bought was an extra one purchased with your own dollar unless you have proof. I might go in with one friend on a lottery ticket, but if I won something big with my "extra" ticket I would certainly expect to give something to my losing partner anyway. Either go it alone or split it with the group, but don't try to have it both ways.
The lesson is, as usual, if you are in a lottery pool don't pretend a ticket you bought was an extra one purchased with your own dollar unless you have proof. I might go in with one friend on a lottery ticket, but if I won something big with my "extra" ticket I would certainly expect to give something to my losing partner anyway. Either go it alone or split it with the group, but don't try to have it both ways.
If you're in a pool, and you're buying the tickets, kiss the proof concept goodbye. Some one will always accuse you of fudging the tickets. Once the first person accuses you of something, the remainder of the group will automatically form a mob, making you out to to be the worst person on the planet. Whether your are guilty, or not, makes no difference. Nothing greater then beating your chest!
I beg to differ against the folks who presume the ticket WASNT purchase by the wife. She could just have easily bought a series of tickets that day or a few days earlier.
I belong to a lottery pool and dern proud of it! Ya'll hear about one or two cases that place a "bad" image on the whole concept without ever once researching ALL the jackpots that are claimed by groups that dont squabble. Sorry I'm too much a beleiver that there are more good acts of kindness and decency then the ones blown out of proportion by a news report. No where in my groups by laws does it say, you cannot play outside the pool or any member of your family may not buy a ticket and win.!
I'd lay a dime to a dollar there is more to this story then the bias reporter is telling . Therefore I wont conclude off the cuff that the guy is guilty. There are three sides to a story, his/theirs and the truth.
"kiss the proof concept goodbye. Some one will always accuse you of fudging the ticket"
Years back when I was still working I would travel over the state line to play power ball often some of my co-workers would ask me to pick up a ticket for them. I would always say NO as if I won how would you know that I did not use your ticket (all would ask just to get them a qp) They would say oh we trust you. I agree with chewie. I only trust myself and that's a questionable choice. All these suits makes it hard to get aboard the pool concept.
<< I beg to differ against the folks who presume the ticket WASNT purchase by the wife. She could just have easily bought a series of tickets that day or a few days earlier. >>
It's certainly possible that the ticket was bought separately from the pool, whether by the wife or no. Based on what's in the article there are a lot of claims by the people suing, but not a lot of facts. One of the claims doesn't ring true, though. Why would it take a month for the store to put up a sign or for the group to see the sign, and if the ticket hasn't been turned in yet, how would the store know who the winner was?
It would be helpful if either the reporter or the lottery commission was smart enough to report how big the "block" of tickets that included the winner was. If it's clear that it was less than 55 tickets it would suggest that it wasn't part of the pool or else he was skimming money and not buying all the tickets. If it appears that it was 55 tickets he probably might as well save the legal fees and just give them the money.
As with other disputes over pool winnings, there's nothing about this story that says pools are inherently bad, but these people obvioulsy didn't set it up at all well.
The pool purchaser always provide everyone in the pool a photo copy of the purchased tickets. They should be quick picks only. The ones YOU play should be manual pick only. Try to avoid being the pool purchaser if you can!
The pool purchaser always provide everyone in the pool a photo copy of the purchased tickets. They should be quick picks only. The ones YOU play should be manual pick only. Try to avoid being the pool purchaser if you can!
If everyone in the pool is cooperative photocopies handed out ahead of time might prevent problems, but if there's a dispute they probably won't mean anything since the only thing they can conclusively prove is that tickets with those numbers were photcopied. Your fellow pool members might accept them as proof that you bought the right number of tickets, but if you also bought a significant winner that you claim doesn't belong to them there's nothing but their honesty to prevent them from simply throwing the photcopies away. Having everyone sign and return the copies might help, but without clear rules that define how tickets are bought people can still claim a different tickets should belong to the pool.
Buying quick picks means it will be impossible to have a written agreement in advance that definitively identifies which tickets will belong to the pool. Unless there is a written agreement that spells out what numbers will be played there may not be any way to conclusively prove whether or not any given ticket does or doesn't rightfully belong to the pool. Specifying where the tickets are bought, and requiring that individual purchases be bought at a different location or be assumed to belong to the pool should be a requirement for any pool run by people with a lick of sense.
When you google "Breakfast Buddy", it usually refer to an older group of citizens who not only share breakfast but are generous, trustworthy and a credit to their community.
Ronald L. LeMaster, Raymond C. McLean, Kenneth B. Ulrich, Robert Holmes Jr., Steve E. Mrofchak, Joseph Celedonia, Donald C. Hoyle, Philip M. Sidoti, and Joseph M. Sidoti and Robert Cebula no longer believe that of Michael Salcone after the Ohio Lottery Commission confirmed that the ticket was part of a block of tickets — and it had not been bought separately as Salcone had told the group.
It was not clear if the winning ticket was part of the block of tickets bought for the pool. The Ohio Lottery Commission said the winning ticket had not yet been claimed and it must be claimed within 180 days after the drawing, or it will be forfeited.
Salcone no longer joins the others for breakfast, and showed up for the last time in early December.
I belong to a lottery pool and dern proud of it! Ya'll hear about one or two cases that place a "bad" image on the whole concept without ever once researching ALL the jackpots that are claimed by groups that dont squabble. Sorry I'm too much a beleiver that there are more good acts of kindness and decency then the ones blown out of proportion by a news report. No where in my groups by laws does it say, you cannot play outside the pool or any member of your family may not buy a ticket and win.!
Gamegirl is right in some respects. However, the trend of modern day morality is to get what you can from who ever you can. In the '90's, people had a different attitude then they do in the '20's. More and more lawsuits are being filed when large sums of money are involved. Maybe it is because the amounts are larger, or it is because the parents no longer emphasize integrity over gains. Look arond most office environments and you will be hard to find some one you would trust with a hand-shake thousand dollar loan. Twenty years ago, you found lots of people you would trust, now you probably won't find any. You wused to work with the same people for years and you trusted them, now you work with them for a year or two and they are gone.
Everything now is based on perception, not on reality. Be it sexual harrassement or buying a lottery ticket. Guilty, no matter what the circumstances. You buy two lottery tickets and give one to some one who asked to have one bought, and thats fine. You buy for a group, and extra for yourself, and you are asking for trouble. The same trouble you ask for when you close the office door and there is one female and one male in the room. You are automatically guilty. Declare you seperate tickets, and selfish of the world will still come after you. Insecurity breeds insecurity.
I wonder what would happen if a lottery ticket was indeed a bearer instrument and no lawsuits based on these "he cheated the lottery pool" claims were possible. If the bearer said the ticket is his alone, he gets all the money, if he says he is sharing it with a pool everyone gets a check. It would all depend on the integrity and honesty of the ticket holder, so you would have to choose your friends wisely. If you don't want to risk a friend or coworker walking off with "your" millions, then don't join a pool.
I wonder what would happen if a lottery ticket was indeed a bearer instrument and no lawsuits based on these "he cheated the lottery pool" claims were possible.
The Trail Lawyers Association have issued a death on sight warrent against you. No one should be allowed to act on their own. That would infer taking responsibility and none of that is allowed any more.
He is a sneak and a thief. He should have known that they would find out..it is sad that many people seem to display a lack of honesty and morals when it comes to money. Makes me wonder if that is a commonplace thing in his life...lying and stealing. I wonder how his bosses look at him now.
The suit asks for a judgment of $350,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages and a finding that the Salcones not get any share of the winnings. The case is assigned to Judge Andrew Logan.
Actually that's smart. They are suing for MORE than the ticket is worth, so he will "settle" the lawsuit by agreeing to split the money like he should have in the beginning. And if he doesn't settle, then the winnings will pay for lawyer's fee, court costs, and make him have to take out a second mortgage to pay his former friends for his greed and theivery.
After reading news reports over the years, seems like the two problems that occur with lottery pools is:
1) past players want a cut due to some vague oral "agreement" even though they didn't kick in money for the winning ticket
2) ticket holder claims it was THEIR personal money that bought the ticket, not the group money.
To address those two problems, in our Mega Millions lottery pool at work we actually have a legal agreement at the top of the signup sheet detailing how it all works.
1) only people signing up for that drawing (and paying money) get a share. Small past winning roll over into new drawings but you HAVE to sign up again (and pay money again) to get a share. Winning part of $5 in the last drawing does not entitle you to a share of the jackpot if we win this week, even though the $5 winnings was used to buy more tickets. That's the rules we have, it's spelled out in writing, and we have your signature that you are agreeing to the rules.
2) Also, we make photocopies of all the tickets BEFORE the each drawing. the photocopies are distributed, so there's no question what the group ticket numbers are. If I'm buying the tickets and I'm not working that day, I've even scanned them at home and e-mailed the attachment to several people at work and they make the copies to distribute. A little more hassle but I don't want there to be any questions if I happen to buy a winner with my own money. Believe me, if you win (as part of a group or by yourself) people will look for any angle to try to get some of that. Our legal agreement and procedures have taken care of any possibility we can think of.
Also, we always buy annuity tickets. That's because IF you buy annuity option you can then choose cash if you want when you present the ticket, but if you have bought a cash option ticket you've already made your choice. Annuity ticket preserves your all your payment options until you present the ticket. You don't actually have to take the annuity with an "annuity" ticket, but you HAVE to take the cash with a "cash" ticket. Not many people know that. So, we would let the group vote on what they want if we ever won -- whether annuity payments or cash. Yeah, most likely the group would choose cash, but why limit the options behore you even win?
I wonder what would happen if a lottery ticket was indeed a bearer instrument and no lawsuits based on these "he cheated the lottery pool" claims were possible. If the bearer said the ticket is his alone, he gets all the money, if he says he is sharing it with a pool everyone gets a check. It would all depend on the integrity and honesty of the ticket holder, so you would have to choose your friends wisely. If you don't want to risk a friend or coworker walking off with "your" millions, then don't join a pool.
What would happen if the mere possession of any of your property, whether it was a lottery ticket, a tv set, or your car meant that I owned it and you had no legal recourse? Ownership of a lottery ticket isn't any different than ownership of other property, and the law already covers all of the necessary issues in enough detail. The law spell out the rules, but it can't make people tell the truth and honor any agreements that they've made. The best it can do is try to sort out the truth and apply that to any agreements the court believes were applicable. Being in a pool increases the chances of a dispute, but the existence of the pool isn't integral to the nature of the disputes. They all result from somebody claiming ownership of something they don't have a legitimate claim to, just like any other dispute over ownership of property, and there's no reason for lottery tickets to be treated any differently than other forms of property.
The only way to guarantee that you will never be party to a dispute over ownership of a lottery ticket is to never win, and never claim a share of somebody else's winnings.
Being in a pool increases the chances of a dispute, but the existence of the pool isn't integral to the nature of the disputes.
Since the topic revolves around a lottery pool, it is primary to the discussion. As long as there is (1) more than one person involved and (2) the issue is large sums of money, there will always be a dispute. If it has not happened, it will happened, it is just a matter of the amount. It is like the old Outer Limits show, where the guy was granted one wish, and he wished for world peace. Poof, he was the only person left on the planet. You will never have peace as long as there is more then one opinion more then one viewpoint, or more then one gun.
Interesting story and comments. The "pool" concept makes sense if you buy into the odds theory that the lotteries propagate, that you divide your odds by the total number of combinations and the number of combinations purchased.
This is just not true. If there are 175 million combinations and you buy 55 tickets your odds of winning are 175 million MINUS 56 (including the winning ticket), not DIVIDED by 55; (that comes out to 174,999,944 to one, not 3,180,000 to one). Mathematical fact.
My point is that a "pool" lowers your odds slightly so why bother with it especially when you read these kind of stories every day. Greed is not a good thing. The only jackpot pool I've heard of lately that won without any problems were the car salesmen in the Chicago area who volunteered to give some of their winnings to a regular member who had not ante'ed up that week. That's the kind of pool I'd like to be in, not a bunch of "breakfast buddies" ready to shove a plastic syrup-coated knife in your back.
Too bad the guy was a chump and couldn't split the group's winnings. If I was on the jury I would probably opt for punative damages also. From the story, it looks pretty air-tight to me. They don't sell 25 quick picks, stop and sell one to another customer, and then continue entering your remaining quick picks.
If he and his wife had ONE OUNCE of brain, they would split the winnings with the pool, apologize profusely and with genuine tears and subtract the legal costs incurred by the other members from their share. MAYBE then they could gain a speck of respect among their friends and community and won't have to move across the nation to avoid their wrath and hatred.
But I'm not surprised he's not breakfasting with them anymore....that kind of says it all.
Sometimes the issue of Having * integrity* lays heavily in court cases. Since most of the reporters allegations are merely on the sums lets play math here. Any citizen may bring any ludicrious amount to the court systems and ask for it in their case. The FACTS are - rarely are those sums granted or ever paid in winning cases. Even when Major corporation are sued -they dont write out a check to the defendent-instead they tie the case up in appeals. What this gang is doing is typical- its DOESNT preclude that because they ask for an high amount that there case is any more solid then molten lava. Since my four dollars that I dump in my lottery pool has the same chance then it makes no difference to me if I do happen to share the pot with my upstanding associates. Chewie mentioned the regulations that some pools maintain and that is precisely the kind I belong to. Hooray for the Lottery pools that are about the *sharing* without bickering! I still am waivering that this guys wife could have very well bought a winning ticket on her own.....Despite the overall opnions of most of the lottery posters....
Well that would be the case to prove for the defendant. Did the defendant's wife regularly buy 55 quick picks for Friday's MM draw at the same store as her husband did for his pool? Were there 55 tickets in that block of tickets that were sold at the same time from that same terminal...(they are date, time and location coded in IL)? Why would she buy 55 tickets and not 50 or 60?
I will call the store clerks as my next witnesses.
I can guarantee that ticket will never be redeemed unless the tearful apologies and acceptance and forgiveness of greed accompany it. What a shame for all of them.
<< Well that would be the case to prove for the defendant. Did the defendant's wife regularly buy 55 quick picks for Friday's MM draw at the same store as her husband did for his pool? Were there 55 tickets in that block of tickets that were sold at the same time from that same terminal...(they are date, time and location coded in IL)? Why would she buy 55 tickets and not 50 or 60? >>
The defendant doesn't have to prove anything. It's up to the plaintiffs to prove their case or they lose. Until the lottery department says how many tickets were in the block containing the winning ticket there is absolutely nothing to indicate that the ticket belongs to the pool other than a bunch of unsupported accusations by people who want to share the winnings.
I might add that the IL Lottery has the time stamp down to the SECOND you purchased it.
If OH does not have this, they should consider it. If you buy 55 quick picks it takes about a minute to crank them out of the machine. This should be a no-brainer. 55 quick picks in one minute from the same terminal is a "block" of tickets.
Maybe I read the article wrong, but I thought it specifically said that the winning ticket came from the same block of tickets purchased at the same time, location and number of tickets purchased (in this case quick picks which makes it easier to decide).
The defendant DOES have to refute the prosecution's allegations and therefore PROVE their innocence before a jury without any doubts from the jury before they can be found innocent or guilty.
Let's let 12 of his peers figure it out. We don't know all the facts and are not in the courtroom right now.
Interesting story and comments. The "pool" concept makes sense if you buy into the odds theory that the lotteries propagate, that you divide your odds by the total number of combinations and the number of combinations purchased.
This is just not true. If there are 175 million combinations and you buy 55 tickets your odds of winning are 175 million MINUS 56 (including the winning ticket), not DIVIDED by 55; (that comes out to 174,999,944 to one, not 3,180,000 to one). Mathematical fact.
My point is that a "pool" lowers your odds slightly so why bother with it especially when you read these kind of stories every day. Greed is not a good thing. The only jackpot pool I've heard of lately that won without any problems were the car salesmen in the Chicago area who volunteered to give some of their winnings to a regular member who had not ante'ed up that week. That's the kind of pool I'd like to be in, not a bunch of "breakfast buddies" ready to shove a plastic syrup-coated knife in your back.
Too bad the guy was a chump and couldn't split the group's winnings. If I was on the jury I would probably opt for punative damages also. From the story, it looks pretty air-tight to me. They don't sell 25 quick picks, stop and sell one to another customer, and then continue entering your remaining quick picks.
If he and his wife had ONE OUNCE of brain, they would split the winnings with the pool, apologize profusely and with genuine tears and subtract the legal costs incurred by the other members from their share. MAYBE then they could gain a speck of respect among their friends and community and won't have to move across the nation to avoid their wrath and hatred.
But I'm not surprised he's not breakfasting with them anymore....that kind of says it all.
I have seen several posts which say about odds of winning when you buy many tickets and some of which seems to be not correct as far as odds/probability/math are concerned. The concept of odds/prabability is a simple one. When it says odds of 1 in 175 million what it actually means that there are 175 million combinations of winning numbers possible and if you get 1 you have a chance of 1 in 175 million. But if you get 10 differant sets of numbers(tickets) you have a chance of 10 in 175 million i.e. 1 in 17.5 million. If you get 100 then you have 1 in 1.75 million. If you get 175 million numbers then you have a chance of 1 in 1 . It is as simple as this and as straight as this. If you work or like to think it as a probablity instead of odds then here it is. probability of winning for a single line of ticket is 1/175,000,000. Probability of winnning for 10 lines of ticket is 1/175,000,000 + 1/175,000,000 ++++ added 10 times which is 10/175,00,000 which is equal to 1/17,500,000.
When you buy 10 combos at 175 million to one odds of hitting the jackpot you are saying that your odds are lowered to 17.5 million to one if I'm not mistaken.
I understand what you are saying when you extrapolate and buy all 175 million combos. But this concept would have to be accepted on an extremely "sliding scale".
But going back to the original example......what happened to those other 174,999,990 combinations that could have beat you? They don't just disappear (as hypersoniq so eloquently put it).
Odds are odds. If you are playing a one digit out of ten game and you play one digit your odds are 9-1 of getting it right. If you play two numbers your odds are lowered to 8-1 of getting it right. Why? Because your first number had to have been wrong so it must be included in the losing propositions. The other digits remaining are still possibilities and can't be ignored.
If you play all ten digits then you will win...but what is the formula for this "sliding scale"?
PS...I'm referring to odds not probability. In my experience odds and probability are the same thing. I'd love to have someone show me the difference.
Join a lottery pool.
I do not think so. I'll pull my own turnips.
Join a lottery pool.
I do not think so. I'll pull my own turnips.
Lottery pools do not increase your chances of winning big games like Powerball or Mega Millions all that much, and commonly introduce problems if you win.
"It(the suit) asks for a judgment of $350,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages and a finding that the Salcones not get any share of the winnings. The case is assigned to Judge Andrew Logan."
That's a new twist, take a $250,000 ticket and get suited for $450,000. It's like real estate, buy a $250,000 house and 2 months later, it worth $450,000.
Stay out of the pool !!
It's too cold this time of year anyway !!
Stay out of pools. Your best friends will shoot you in the head!!!!!!!!
This is crazy....this is beginning to happen daily. I imagine if one of my friends wins a $300 million jackpot, I am going to sue them for over $500 million. Seems just, doesn't it?
"The suit asks for a preliminary injunction restraining the Salcones from transferring, concealing or destroying any of their property and stopping five banks and a credit union from releasing any funds to the Salcones."
not to mention having your bank account frozen...
Join a lottery pool.
I do not think so. I'll pull my own turnips.
Lottery pools do not increase your chances of winning big games like Powerball or Mega Millions all that much, and commonly introduce problems if you win.
The part about freezing your bank account is a big enough deterrent for me.
"It(the suit) asks for a judgment of $350,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages and a finding that the Salcones not get any share of the winnings. The case is assigned to Judge Andrew Logan."
That's a new twist, take a $250,000 ticket and get suited for $450,000. It's like real estate, buy a $250,000 house and 2 months later, it worth $450,000.
This guy is a liar and a thief stealing from honest friends that put their trust in him. If they get this kind of judgement against him then he gets what he deserves. I'm sure the lawyer they get to represent their case will more than make up for the difference in the settlement.
When some of the group members saw a sign a few days later indicating that the Giant Eagle on Elm Road had sold a $250,000 winning ticket, they asked and were told the winner was Salcone, the suit says. Salcone then indicated the winner was his wife — but she played the game on a Tuesday, not a Friday, it says. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Here is the opposite side of the argument of why your name has to be made public if you win.....If this guy did what he did,,,he should probably want to cut a deal before this gets to court......He just blew at minimum $27,500 and a maximum of $250,000, not to mention he lost 10 friends and most of his wife's respect (unless she talked him into it.)....
He is a sneak and a thief. He should have known that they would find out..it is sad that many people seem to display a lack of honesty and morals when it comes to money. Makes me wonder if that is a commonplace thing in his life...lying and stealing. I wonder how his bosses look at him now.
Buddies and money don't mix. The only Buddy I've ever trusted walked on four legs and barked when I feed him and he never asked for a ¢ent.
Buddies and money don't mix. The only Buddy I've ever trusted walked on four legs and barked when I feed him and he never asked for a ¢ent.
May be this guy is not a thief and his buddies are jealous of his win and trying to make his life miserable. There are many who would like/work to make your life like hell if they remain miserable/poor and you suddenly become rich. If you are in a pool and even if someone else other than you bought the pool's ticket and by your good luck you won on your own ticket. The remaining memebers can lie against you and say that you bought the ticket and you may not have any thing to defend yourself unless there is some documentary evidence.
Usually it is the odd man out complaining, this time it appears the ticket buyer was the scum. It never fails, the pack animal mentality of humans is doomed from the beginning. Learn to stand on your own two feet and you won't have to worry about friends cheating you. I met a lot of guys in the Army I would trust my life with, but I wouldn't trust the guy across the street with my dirty laundry.
The lesson is, as usual, if you are in a lottery pool don't pretend a ticket you bought was an extra one purchased with your own dollar unless you have proof. I might go in with one friend on a lottery ticket, but if I won something big with my "extra" ticket I would certainly expect to give something to my losing partner anyway. Either go it alone or split it with the group, but don't try to have it both ways.
That's exactly why I don't buy extra tickets outside of my lottery pool.
The lesson is, as usual, if you are in a lottery pool don't pretend a ticket you bought was an extra one purchased with your own dollar unless you have proof. I might go in with one friend on a lottery ticket, but if I won something big with my "extra" ticket I would certainly expect to give something to my losing partner anyway. Either go it alone or split it with the group, but don't try to have it both ways.
If you're in a pool, and you're buying the tickets, kiss the proof concept goodbye. Some one will always accuse you of fudging the tickets. Once the first person accuses you of something, the remainder of the group will automatically form a mob, making you out to to be the worst person on the planet. Whether your are guilty, or not, makes no difference. Nothing greater then beating your chest!
I beg to differ against the folks who presume the ticket WASNT purchase by the wife. She could just have easily bought a series of tickets that day or a few days earlier.
I belong to a lottery pool and dern proud of it! Ya'll hear about one or two cases that place a "bad" image on the whole concept without ever once researching ALL the jackpots that are claimed by groups that dont squabble. Sorry I'm too much a beleiver that there are more good acts of kindness and decency then the ones blown out of proportion by a news report. No where in my groups by laws does it say, you cannot play outside the pool or any member of your family may not buy a ticket and win.!
I'd lay a dime to a dollar there is more to this story then the bias reporter is telling . Therefore I wont conclude off the cuff that the guy is guilty. There are three sides to a story, his/theirs and the truth.
"kiss the proof concept goodbye. Some one will always accuse you of fudging the ticket"
Years back when I was still working I would travel over the state line to play power ball often some of my co-workers would ask me to pick up a ticket for them. I would always say NO as if I won how would you know that I did not use your ticket (all would ask just to get them a qp) They would say oh we trust you. I agree with chewie. I only trust myself and that's a questionable choice. All these suits makes it hard to get aboard the pool concept.
TheGameGrl wrote:
<< I beg to differ against the folks who presume the ticket WASNT purchase by the wife. She could just have easily bought a series of tickets that day or a few days earlier. >>
It's certainly possible that the ticket was bought separately from the pool, whether by the wife or no. Based on what's in the article there are a lot of claims by the people suing, but not a lot of facts. One of the claims doesn't ring true, though. Why would it take a month for the store to put up a sign or for the group to see the sign, and if the ticket hasn't been turned in yet, how would the store know who the winner was?
It would be helpful if either the reporter or the lottery commission was smart enough to report how big the "block" of tickets that included the winner was. If it's clear that it was less than 55 tickets it would suggest that it wasn't part of the pool or else he was skimming money and not buying all the tickets. If it appears that it was 55 tickets he probably might as well save the legal fees and just give them the money.
As with other disputes over pool winnings, there's nothing about this story that says pools are inherently bad, but these people obvioulsy didn't set it up at all well.
The pool purchaser always provide everyone in the pool a photo copy of the purchased tickets. They should be quick picks only. The ones YOU play should be manual pick only. Try to avoid being the pool purchaser if you can!
DON'T be like mike.......that man is greedy and cheated his friends.
The pool purchaser always provide everyone in the pool a photo copy of the purchased tickets. They should be quick picks only. The ones YOU play should be manual pick only. Try to avoid being the pool purchaser if you can!
If everyone in the pool is cooperative photocopies handed out ahead of time might prevent problems, but if there's a dispute they probably won't mean anything since the only thing they can conclusively prove is that tickets with those numbers were photcopied. Your fellow pool members might accept them as proof that you bought the right number of tickets, but if you also bought a significant winner that you claim doesn't belong to them there's nothing but their honesty to prevent them from simply throwing the photcopies away. Having everyone sign and return the copies might help, but without clear rules that define how tickets are bought people can still claim a different tickets should belong to the pool.
Buying quick picks means it will be impossible to have a written agreement in advance that definitively identifies which tickets will belong to the pool. Unless there is a written agreement that spells out what numbers will be played there may not be any way to conclusively prove whether or not any given ticket does or doesn't rightfully belong to the pool. Specifying where the tickets are bought, and requiring that individual purchases be bought at a different location or be assumed to belong to the pool should be a requirement for any pool run by people with a lick of sense.
Are the remaining 10 still Pooling their Funds to buy MegaMillions Tickets?
When you google "Breakfast Buddy", it usually refer to an older group of citizens who not only share breakfast but are generous, trustworthy and a credit to their community.
Ronald L. LeMaster, Raymond C. McLean, Kenneth B. Ulrich, Robert Holmes Jr., Steve E. Mrofchak, Joseph Celedonia, Donald C. Hoyle, Philip M. Sidoti, and Joseph M. Sidoti and Robert Cebula no longer believe that of Michael Salcone after the Ohio Lottery Commission confirmed that the ticket was part of a block of tickets — and it had not been bought separately as Salcone had told the group.
It was not clear if the winning ticket was part of the block of tickets bought for the pool. The Ohio Lottery Commission said the winning ticket had not yet been claimed and it must be claimed within 180 days after the drawing, or it will be forfeited.
Salcone no longer joins the others for breakfast, and showed up for the last time in early December.
I belong to a lottery pool and dern proud of it! Ya'll hear about one or two cases that place a "bad" image on the whole concept without ever once researching ALL the jackpots that are claimed by groups that dont squabble. Sorry I'm too much a beleiver that there are more good acts of kindness and decency then the ones blown out of proportion by a news report. No where in my groups by laws does it say, you cannot play outside the pool or any member of your family may not buy a ticket and win.!
Gamegirl is right in some respects. However, the trend of modern day morality is to get what you can from who ever you can. In the '90's, people had a different attitude then they do in the '20's. More and more lawsuits are being filed when large sums of money are involved. Maybe it is because the amounts are larger, or it is because the parents no longer emphasize integrity over gains. Look arond most office environments and you will be hard to find some one you would trust with a hand-shake thousand dollar loan. Twenty years ago, you found lots of people you would trust, now you probably won't find any. You wused to work with the same people for years and you trusted them, now you work with them for a year or two and they are gone.
Everything now is based on perception, not on reality. Be it sexual harrassement or buying a lottery ticket. Guilty, no matter what the circumstances. You buy two lottery tickets and give one to some one who asked to have one bought, and thats fine. You buy for a group, and extra for yourself, and you are asking for trouble. The same trouble you ask for when you close the office door and there is one female and one male in the room. You are automatically guilty. Declare you seperate tickets, and selfish of the world will still come after you. Insecurity breeds insecurity.
This guy sounds like Dora Leal all over again! It's a shame.
I wonder what would happen if a lottery ticket was indeed a bearer instrument and no lawsuits based on these "he cheated the lottery pool" claims were possible. If the bearer said the ticket is his alone, he gets all the money, if he says he is sharing it with a pool everyone gets a check. It would all depend on the integrity and honesty of the ticket holder, so you would have to choose your friends wisely. If you don't want to risk a friend or coworker walking off with "your" millions, then don't join a pool.
Some of them are, aren't they?
I wonder what would happen if a lottery ticket was indeed a bearer instrument and no lawsuits based on these "he cheated the lottery pool" claims were possible.
The Trail Lawyers Association have issued a death on sight warrent against you. No one should be allowed to act on their own. That would infer taking responsibility and none of that is allowed any more.
He is a sneak and a thief. He should have known that they would find out..it is sad that many people seem to display a lack of honesty and morals when it comes to money. Makes me wonder if that is a commonplace thing in his life...lying and stealing. I wonder how his bosses look at him now.
The suit asks for a judgment of $350,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages and a finding that the Salcones not get any share of the winnings. The case is assigned to Judge Andrew Logan.
Actually that's smart. They are suing for MORE than the ticket is worth, so he will "settle" the lawsuit by agreeing to split the money like he should have in the beginning. And if he doesn't settle, then the winnings will pay for lawyer's fee, court costs, and make him have to take out a second mortgage to pay his former friends for his greed and theivery.
After reading news reports over the years, seems like the two problems that occur with lottery pools is:
To address those two problems, in our Mega Millions lottery pool at work we actually have a legal agreement at the top of the signup sheet detailing how it all works.
I wonder what would happen if a lottery ticket was indeed a bearer instrument and no lawsuits based on these "he cheated the lottery pool" claims were possible. If the bearer said the ticket is his alone, he gets all the money, if he says he is sharing it with a pool everyone gets a check. It would all depend on the integrity and honesty of the ticket holder, so you would have to choose your friends wisely. If you don't want to risk a friend or coworker walking off with "your" millions, then don't join a pool.
What would happen if the mere possession of any of your property, whether it was a lottery ticket, a tv set, or your car meant that I owned it and you had no legal recourse? Ownership of a lottery ticket isn't any different than ownership of other property, and the law already covers all of the necessary issues in enough detail. The law spell out the rules, but it can't make people tell the truth and honor any agreements that they've made. The best it can do is try to sort out the truth and apply that to any agreements the court believes were applicable. Being in a pool increases the chances of a dispute, but the existence of the pool isn't integral to the nature of the disputes. They all result from somebody claiming ownership of something they don't have a legitimate claim to, just like any other dispute over ownership of property, and there's no reason for lottery tickets to be treated any differently than other forms of property.
The only way to guarantee that you will never be party to a dispute over ownership of a lottery ticket is to never win, and never claim a share of somebody else's winnings.
Being in a pool increases the chances of a dispute, but the existence of the pool isn't integral to the nature of the disputes.
Since the topic revolves around a lottery pool, it is primary to the discussion. As long as there is (1) more than one person involved and (2) the issue is large sums of money, there will always be a dispute. If it has not happened, it will happened, it is just a matter of the amount. It is like the old Outer Limits show, where the guy was granted one wish, and he wished for world peace. Poof, he was the only person left on the planet. You will never have peace as long as there is more then one opinion more then one viewpoint, or more then one gun.
Interesting story and comments. The "pool" concept makes sense if you buy into the odds theory that the lotteries propagate, that you divide your odds by the total number of combinations and the number of combinations purchased.
This is just not true. If there are 175 million combinations and you buy 55 tickets your odds of winning are 175 million MINUS 56 (including the winning ticket), not DIVIDED by 55; (that comes out to 174,999,944 to one, not 3,180,000 to one). Mathematical fact.
My point is that a "pool" lowers your odds slightly so why bother with it especially when you read these kind of stories every day. Greed is not a good thing. The only jackpot pool I've heard of lately that won without any problems were the car salesmen in the Chicago area who volunteered to give some of their winnings to a regular member who had not ante'ed up that week. That's the kind of pool I'd like to be in, not a bunch of "breakfast buddies" ready to shove a plastic syrup-coated knife in your back.
Too bad the guy was a chump and couldn't split the group's winnings. If I was on the jury I would probably opt for punative damages also. From the story, it looks pretty air-tight to me. They don't sell 25 quick picks, stop and sell one to another customer, and then continue entering your remaining quick picks.
If he and his wife had ONE OUNCE of brain, they would split the winnings with the pool, apologize profusely and with genuine tears and subtract the legal costs incurred by the other members from their share. MAYBE then they could gain a speck of respect among their friends and community and won't have to move across the nation to avoid their wrath and hatred.
But I'm not surprised he's not breakfasting with them anymore....that kind of says it all.
Sometimes the issue of Having * integrity* lays heavily in court cases. Since most of the reporters allegations are merely on the sums lets play math here. Any citizen may bring any ludicrious amount to the court systems and ask for it in their case. The FACTS are - rarely are those sums granted or ever paid in winning cases. Even when Major corporation are sued -they dont write out a check to the defendent-instead they tie the case up in appeals. What this gang is doing is typical- its DOESNT preclude that because they ask for an high amount that there case is any more solid then molten lava. Since my four dollars that I dump in my lottery pool has the same chance then it makes no difference to me if I do happen to share the pot with my upstanding associates. Chewie mentioned the regulations that some pools maintain and that is precisely the kind I belong to. Hooray for the Lottery pools that are about the *sharing* without bickering! I still am waivering that this guys wife could have very well bought a winning ticket on her own.....Despite the overall opnions of most of the lottery posters....
Well that would be the case to prove for the defendant. Did the defendant's wife regularly buy 55 quick picks for Friday's MM draw at the same store as her husband did for his pool? Were there 55 tickets in that block of tickets that were sold at the same time from that same terminal...(they are date, time and location coded in IL)? Why would she buy 55 tickets and not 50 or 60?
I can guarantee that ticket will never be redeemed unless the tearful apologies and acceptance and forgiveness of greed accompany it. What a shame for all of them.I will call the store clerks as my next witnesses.
Rick G wrote:
<< Well that would be the case to prove for the defendant. Did the defendant's wife regularly buy 55 quick picks for Friday's MM draw at the same store as her husband did for his pool? Were there 55 tickets in that block of tickets that were sold at the same time from that same terminal...(they are date, time and location coded in IL)? Why would she buy 55 tickets and not 50 or 60? >>
The defendant doesn't have to prove anything. It's up to the plaintiffs to prove their case or they lose. Until the lottery department says how many tickets were in the block containing the winning ticket there is absolutely nothing to indicate that the ticket belongs to the pool other than a bunch of unsupported accusations by people who want to share the winnings.
I might add that the IL Lottery has the time stamp down to the SECOND you purchased it.
If OH does not have this, they should consider it. If you buy 55 quick picks it takes about a minute to crank them out of the machine. This should be a no-brainer. 55 quick picks in one minute from the same terminal is a "block" of tickets.
KY,
Maybe I read the article wrong, but I thought it specifically said that the winning ticket came from the same block of tickets purchased at the same time, location and number of tickets purchased (in this case quick picks which makes it easier to decide).
The defendant DOES have to refute the prosecution's allegations and therefore PROVE their innocence before a jury without any doubts from the jury before they can be found innocent or guilty.
Let's let 12 of his peers figure it out. We don't know all the facts and are not in the courtroom right now.
Interesting story and comments. The "pool" concept makes sense if you buy into the odds theory that the lotteries propagate, that you divide your odds by the total number of combinations and the number of combinations purchased.
This is just not true. If there are 175 million combinations and you buy 55 tickets your odds of winning are 175 million MINUS 56 (including the winning ticket), not DIVIDED by 55; (that comes out to 174,999,944 to one, not 3,180,000 to one). Mathematical fact.
My point is that a "pool" lowers your odds slightly so why bother with it especially when you read these kind of stories every day. Greed is not a good thing. The only jackpot pool I've heard of lately that won without any problems were the car salesmen in the Chicago area who volunteered to give some of their winnings to a regular member who had not ante'ed up that week. That's the kind of pool I'd like to be in, not a bunch of "breakfast buddies" ready to shove a plastic syrup-coated knife in your back.
Too bad the guy was a chump and couldn't split the group's winnings. If I was on the jury I would probably opt for punative damages also. From the story, it looks pretty air-tight to me. They don't sell 25 quick picks, stop and sell one to another customer, and then continue entering your remaining quick picks.
If he and his wife had ONE OUNCE of brain, they would split the winnings with the pool, apologize profusely and with genuine tears and subtract the legal costs incurred by the other members from their share. MAYBE then they could gain a speck of respect among their friends and community and won't have to move across the nation to avoid their wrath and hatred.
But I'm not surprised he's not breakfasting with them anymore....that kind of says it all.
I have seen several posts which say about odds of winning when you buy many tickets and some of which seems to be not correct as far as odds/probability/math are concerned. The concept of odds/prabability is a simple one.
When it says odds of 1 in 175 million what it actually means that there are 175 million combinations of winning numbers possible and if you get 1 you have a chance of 1 in 175 million. But if you get 10 differant sets of numbers(tickets) you have a chance of 10 in 175 million i.e. 1 in 17.5 million. If you get 100 then you have 1 in 1.75 million. If you get 175 million numbers then you have a chance of 1 in 1 . It is as simple as this and as straight as this.
If you work or like to think it as a probablity instead of odds then here it is.
probability of winning for a single line of ticket is 1/175,000,000.
Probability of winnning for 10 lines of ticket is 1/175,000,000 + 1/175,000,000 ++++ added 10 times
which is 10/175,00,000 which is equal to 1/17,500,000.
Rlevins,
When you buy 10 combos at 175 million to one odds of hitting the jackpot you are saying that your odds are lowered to 17.5 million to one if I'm not mistaken.
I understand what you are saying when you extrapolate and buy all 175 million combos. But this concept would have to be accepted on an extremely "sliding scale".
But going back to the original example......what happened to those other 174,999,990 combinations that could have beat you? They don't just disappear (as hypersoniq so eloquently put it).
Odds are odds. If you are playing a one digit out of ten game and you play one digit your odds are 9-1 of getting it right. If you play two numbers your odds are lowered to 8-1 of getting it right. Why? Because your first number had to have been wrong so it must be included in the losing propositions. The other digits remaining are still possibilities and can't be ignored.
If you play all ten digits then you will win...but what is the formula for this "sliding scale"?
PS...I'm referring to odds not probability. In my experience odds and probability are the same thing. I'd love to have someone show me the difference.