Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 3, 2016, 10:44 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Piqua lottery winners sued by co-workers

Topic closed. 74 replies. Last post 8 years ago by KeithK.

Page 5 of 5
51
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
New Member
Tennessee
United States
Member #68814
December 31, 2008
6 Posts
Offline
Posted: December 31, 2008, 1:07 am - IP Logged

I agree with you Mario 38.  I'm starting a pool here in my office and everyone will sign an agreement of understanding that will state who's eligible to collect winnings, etc. etc.  I still drive daily even though car wrecks continue to happen.  You do what you can to mitigate the risks and then move forward with your chosen course of action.

 

Oh and yes I'm a new member.  Hello to all from Tennessee.

    AmuzingP3s's avatar - Lottery-009.jpg
    Texas
    United States
    Member #39
    December 10, 2001
    567 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: December 31, 2008, 1:22 am - IP Logged

    I agree with you Mario 38.  I'm starting a pool here in my office and everyone will sign an agreement of understanding that will state who's eligible to collect winnings, etc. etc.  I still drive daily even though car wrecks continue to happen.  You do what you can to mitigate the risks and then move forward with your chosen course of action.

     

    Oh and yes I'm a new member.  Hello to all from Tennessee.

    Hi, and welcome to LP DavidTn

    That's how is done, when I was managing my club, I used do everything, no matter what happened. From picking the numbers (they wanted me to), collecting the money, filling out the cards, purchasing the tickets, preparing the agreement (which was signed by everyone), and making and distributing the copies of both tickets and agreement. Oh, there was one thing that one of the guys used to help me with, and that was to proof the tickets against the software list of numbers. There were a couple of times that one ticket was wrong by one digit. So, I would then add the extra line of numbers to the agreement, collect the extra dollar (.25 cents a piece) and purchase the missing ticket. I would follow the same rules all the way through. Actually when we won the 5 numbers they all were mad at me because I hadn't made a mistake that day when filling out the cards. Big Smile The digit that came out was 1 and we had 2. Otherwise we would have won the jackpot that day.

    Big Smile Good Luck to All Wink

      autoprt's avatar - DiscoBallGlowing

      United States
      Member #39356
      May 14, 2006
      44 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: December 31, 2008, 2:08 am - IP Logged

      well said,

      i wouldn't even bother bringing up anything like this if i were involved.

      they weren't there, they didn't pay they lost out. Basically in pools all you are doing is adding the tickets you buy  to the other tickets that are bought.

      i'm sure if the numbers didn't come out they wouldn't have paid any money to the pool and probably didn't do so when they were out in the past. all they had to do was call that day of the drawing and tell someone to add their share of the money and they would repay them, if any of them did that then they should be entitled, if not then they shouldn't be.

        grengrad's avatar - nw rogue.jpg
        Raleigh
        United States
        Member #49057
        January 17, 2007
        172 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: December 31, 2008, 12:28 pm - IP Logged

        Carnifex: "I have to wonder because if people can just tie up your money until you get so sick of waiting you pay them off...what's to stop them from doing it?"

        Nothing, just the cost of their lawyer, but there are some lawyers who might take the case for no upfront costs.

        If you are missing out on 4%/year of $25,000,000, that is $1,000,000 per year you lose, and financial battles might take a few years. You can counter sue them for cost's, but chances are they don't have the money to pay you anything close to how much is being lost by having the money tied up. You are often better off settling out of court, if they will take a small settlement to make their lies go away.

        If you have a good lawyer, you should be able to unfreeze all of the money, other than the portion that is being contested. So, if someone claims they are entitled to 25% of your money, you should be able to have only 25% frozen.

          Avatar
          New Member
          Dayton, OH
          United States
          Member #68581
          December 25, 2008
          6 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: January 1, 2009, 5:17 am - IP Logged

          Carnifex: "I have to wonder because if people can just tie up your money until you get so sick of waiting you pay them off...what's to stop them from doing it?"

          Nothing, just the cost of their lawyer, but there are some lawyers who might take the case for no upfront costs.

          If you are missing out on 4%/year of $25,000,000, that is $1,000,000 per year you lose, and financial battles might take a few years. You can counter sue them for cost's, but chances are they don't have the money to pay you anything close to how much is being lost by having the money tied up. You are often better off settling out of court, if they will take a small settlement to make their lies go away.

          If you have a good lawyer, you should be able to unfreeze all of the money, other than the portion that is being contested. So, if someone claims they are entitled to 25% of your money, you should be able to have only 25% frozen.

          Yeah just the point is, there's a crime being committed there.  People trying to take what isn't theirs. Now this isn't to say there are legitimate claims to be made as to winning tickets being shared ventures between people, but there's just too much room to allow for someone to extort you under a watercooler discussion of "if you won" or a he said/she said type deal.  There should be a real threat of criminal charges if you try to pull this on someone and it comes to light that you really had no legs to stand on and it should be brought against those people by the State's who don't allow for anonymous claims and not have to be pressed by the winners themselves.

           

          The Hobbs Act defines "extortion" as "the obtaining of property fromanother, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual orthreatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right."18 U.S.C. S 1951(b)(2).

            Avatar
            Bethesda, Maryland
            United States
            Member #16901
            June 6, 2005
            446 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: January 1, 2009, 12:11 pm - IP Logged

            Hi, and welcome to LP DavidTn

            That's how is done, when I was managing my club, I used do everything, no matter what happened. From picking the numbers (they wanted me to), collecting the money, filling out the cards, purchasing the tickets, preparing the agreement (which was signed by everyone), and making and distributing the copies of both tickets and agreement. Oh, there was one thing that one of the guys used to help me with, and that was to proof the tickets against the software list of numbers. There were a couple of times that one ticket was wrong by one digit. So, I would then add the extra line of numbers to the agreement, collect the extra dollar (.25 cents a piece) and purchase the missing ticket. I would follow the same rules all the way through. Actually when we won the 5 numbers they all were mad at me because I hadn't made a mistake that day when filling out the cards. Big Smile The digit that came out was 1 and we had 2. Otherwise we would have won the jackpot that day.

            AmuzingP3s......Happy New Year

            ......My only question is why did you stop managing your office pool.......considering how organized you were, better than some accountants.....;....) Why did you stop?

              AmuzingP3s's avatar - Lottery-009.jpg
              Texas
              United States
              Member #39
              December 10, 2001
              567 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: January 1, 2009, 12:58 pm - IP Logged

              AmuzingP3s......Happy New Year

              ......My only question is why did you stop managing your office pool.......considering how organized you were, better than some accountants.....;....) Why did you stop?

              Hi, Libra926

               

              Happy New Year to you too! I am almost sure I posted the reason why we stopped the pool, but to my surprise, I now see it isn't there. The company I used to work decided to downsize and offered a package to those who wanted it. Two of us in the pool took that offer, so we took our money bags and left and the pool dissolved. I wasn't really that specific on my original post, I just said two of us had decided to quit our jobs.

              I now Lotto on my own, but only every now and then. I don't like the 54 numbers set of balls, as opposed to the 50 we had then.

              Big Smile Good Luck to All Wink

                Lotto*Love's avatar - lips
                Washington *state*
                United States
                Member #62009
                June 14, 2008
                192 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: January 1, 2009, 1:44 pm - IP Logged

                I've never been in a lottery pool before, so I'm not sure how it runs.

                If a office pool is say...10 people....is each drawing $10 always?  What I mean by that is if the 10 people pitch in $1.00 each for a $10.00 ticket..and it turns out NOT to be a winner..then the next drawing is $1 ea. for $10. ticket again.

                If their $10.00 ticket turns out to win say $7.00, do they still collect $1.00 from everyone for $10...and ADD the $7 previous win for a total of $17.00 worth of tickets?

                I could understand if some of the previous winnings belonged to the ones sueing.  The winning pool members used someone elses winning share from a previous game to help win that draw.  Is that what happened?

                I guess it really is best to have some kind of written agreement, and do the asking way before the next drawing.  The could..............

                After the drawing..."We won $7, who is playing next drawing?  Your not?  And your not?  Okay then, heres your winning share of the $7 and everyone else who is playing put in your dollar and we will use whats left of the $7 win to add to the $10."

                 

                That way, they would not have a claim on the jackpot if the next drawing wins.

                Or do pools play a certain amount everytime?  10 people $10 dollars no matter what?  I was just thinking that because what do you do if you play $10 and you win say $3 on that try so your short $7 to make a $10 ticket next drawing.  Do you ask who's playing...pay those who are not their share..and ask the remaining pool members who will play to pay their portion to make it $10.

                10 people pool...only 8 will play the next game...pay those not playing their .30 cents to pay them out of the next game...ask the remaining 8 to give $1.25 to make it $10. Sometimes you pay a little over $1, and sometimes you pay just some pocket change.

                IF that ticket gets lucky and say they win $14...and the next drawing EVERYONE is playing again..then no one has to pay their $1.00 because the money box has $14.  They simply take out $10, and still have the $4 in the box for the next drawing where they will have to pitch in their portion to make it $10.

                I guess I thought of that so sometimes you pay, sometimes you don't.  And if the money box has enough funds for $10, then those that are not at work that day don't have to worry about pitching in because the money box did it for them?

                Okay, so I confused myself now.......most likely because I didn't finish my coffee this morning.  So I'm gonna shut up for now..but please tell me how your office pool runs.

                OH....AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!Jester

                I sure hope 2009 treats me better then 2008 did...YUCK!!!!!Blue Thinking

                Surrender You can run, but you can't hide mighty Jackpot...surrender to me at once!

                  AmuzingP3s's avatar - Lottery-009.jpg
                  Texas
                  United States
                  Member #39
                  December 10, 2001
                  567 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: January 1, 2009, 2:07 pm - IP Logged

                  Hi, LottoLove

                  The way we did ours: we always played the same 18-number wheel and the same amount of draws, 42. We always contributed $10.50 per draw to make up the $42.00. We were only 4 and the same group of people. We didn't play every draw, just after the jackpot hit a certain amount.

                  As an example, and to answer your question, if we had won $7.00 as you mention, we would divide the $7.00 among the 4 members for a payout of $1.75 a piece. When the next opportunity to play arises, we would then contribute $10.50 each again.

                  We never did this, but I knew someone who managed a pool. They used to purchase quick picks, like 100. They used to play once a week, I believe. Their membership were always different people and the amount contributed was also different, depending on how much every person wanted to play. If they won something, they had a choice of getting the prize or leaving it on the pool for the next time. The lady who managed the pool also made copies of the tickets for everyone and she had an agreement signed by everyone involved.  I think that comprised  more work and it was more complicated than what I did. Each one would get their prize based on their percentage of contribution.

                  Big Smile Good Luck to All Wink

                    Avatar
                    NY
                    United States
                    Member #23835
                    October 16, 2005
                    3474 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: January 1, 2009, 2:31 pm - IP Logged

                    Yeah just the point is, there's a crime being committed there.  People trying to take what isn't theirs. Now this isn't to say there are legitimate claims to be made as to winning tickets being shared ventures between people, but there's just too much room to allow for someone to extort you under a watercooler discussion of "if you won" or a he said/she said type deal.  There should be a real threat of criminal charges if you try to pull this on someone and it comes to light that you really had no legs to stand on and it should be brought against those people by the State's who don't allow for anonymous claims and not have to be pressed by the winners themselves.

                     

                    The Hobbs Act defines "extortion" as "the obtaining of property fromanother, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual orthreatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right."18 U.S.C. S 1951(b)(2).

                    You've got two choices. You can require that people have absolute proof before bringing a legal action, or you can allow them to bring that action when they may not be able to prove their case. If you choose the former, you'll be SOL if you're on a deserted sidewalk and get hit by a drunk driver who claims you stepped into the road. If you choose the latter, innocent people will sometimes be sued or arrested.

                    Unless the people suing beleieve that they don't have a legitimate claim this is no different than any other situation where there is a legitimate difference of opinion, except fo the amount of money involved, and there definitely isn't acrime being comitted on the part of the plaintiffs. OTOH, if their claims are true, the defendants may be commiting a crime by trying to cheat them out of a share that they are entitled to. Most likely, it is just a legitimate difference of opinion.  I haven't seen much about the defendants' claims, but it seems like there was no written agreement that clearly spelled out the rules. If that's the case, the winners whould have been expecting this. If they reaally did use money from a previous win that the plaintiffs  participated in,  then they deserve it.

                      Avatar
                      New Member
                      Dayton, OH
                      United States
                      Member #68581
                      December 25, 2008
                      6 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: January 2, 2009, 3:36 am - IP Logged

                      Well I don't know how it is from state to state exactly, but pretty much if you're driving drunk you're guilty of driving under the influence no matter what happened.  Pulled over for speeding, drunk?  DUI.  No seatbelt, drunk?  DUI.  Got hit by another drunk, while you were drunk?  DUI for two.

                       

                      So, whether or not I can absolutely prove I didn't step out on the road or not, the guy who hit me is still charged with a DUI which he will have to defend against seperately.  And based on his winning or losing that case, my case against him will change.

                       

                      Now back to extortion.  This case is grey to me, and yes the people have a justifiable reason for bringing the case forward.  There's a chance that they contributed to the winning pot, but just not to the tune of a dollar and then some like everyone else (which I posted about earlier).  But if that were true, then they wouldn't be asking for a full share compared to everyone else who had previous winnings AND a dollar in play.  Any ticket purchased could have won it, and if one person in the 15 hadn't put in the extra dollar they might have not won.

                       

                      So in a sense, rightfully I think they are entitled to something but at a lower contribution rate since they didn't put in a dollar.  While everyone else who played both pots put in a dollar and some change from the previous winnings.  While this isn't extortion, their sought amount certainly isn't rational.

                       

                      Now, back to my original scenario.  Where states that don't allow anonymous winners (Ohio allows for blind trusts but chances are most winners aren't told), there is the chance people will try to baselessly claim ownership of some or all of their winnings.  This is where the state should step in and charge these people with extortion.  Just like the drunk who gets a DUI for hitting me with his car whether it's my fault or his.  These people should face extortion charges if they try to position themselves to where they block the true winner from their winnings...trying to stalemate them until they pay them some amount to drop the suit.  If the state wants to publicize the winners name, they should put some effort into discouraging non-legit claimants on other people's winnings.

                       

                      It could just as easily be a well off boss and a part time minimum wage employee ...the employee wins and doesn't have the resources to fight the boss if he decides to say he put the money down for the tickets.  The boss is just going to wear the employee down financially until he gives in because he can't afford to fight it..and the whole time the winnings will be tied up until the case is decided or settled.  Extortion.

                        Avatar
                        NY
                        United States
                        Member #23835
                        October 16, 2005
                        3474 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: January 2, 2009, 4:06 am - IP Logged

                        Let's consider that you were actually hit by a sober nun who honestly believes she  wasn't on thee sidewalk, then. Plenty of lawsuits (and criminal cases) are essentially he said she said cases.

                        In the Piqua case, the plaintiffs are claiming an agreement that all would share. Such an agreement strikes me as foolish if people  chose whether or not to participate on a draw by draw basis, but we have no way of knowing what the agreements really were. Perhaps there was such an agreement, based on the assumption that everybody would play in every drawing, and  the plaintiffs just didn't get included for some reason. In that case, the reason and the original intent of the agrement both come into play. For all we know, the ticket was bought 3 days before the drawing, when the plaintiffs werent at work, and when the plaintiffs offered to pay two days before the drawing they were told  they could settle when they paid for the following drawing. They could have legitimately assumed that meant they were being included, while the pool member they spoke to legitimately assumed they would rejoin the rest in the subsequent drawing. From the article posted here all we really know is that there doesn't seem to be a written agreement, and there is some dispute as to who was a (partial) participant.

                          Avatar
                          New Member
                          Dayton, OH
                          United States
                          Member #68581
                          December 25, 2008
                          6 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: January 2, 2009, 8:07 pm - IP Logged

                          Again it just doesn't add up simply because the guy who put in 2 bucks (1 for himself, 1 for his mother) was given two shares of the pot.  If the rest of the 13 agreed that was fair and within their lotto pot agreement... then it seems there were two agreements made on how to split the winnings.  Seems to be in the "A little to convenient" department for me.  Plus can always roll on over to Dayton Daily News (where this forum got the article) and read the comments there.  Lots of emotion and hearsay but interesting nonetheless.  Myself, I see they weren't at work admitted by themselves and couldn't contribute to the pool.  They claim they were regular players at the top of the article, so you would assume that someone in the pool would have contacted them to see if they wanted in or they would have put in their money before they were off from work if possible if not called to say they'll pay them back.  Agreement or not, it doesn't make sense that they didn't make sure the dollar was in if they were "regular" players.  And if it's you half buy 7 tickets this drawing, and we'll buy 7 tickets next drawing.....then why were people contributing to the pot?  My point is, 15 people are sharing this pot...and they some how magically decided to cut out 4 people who were in a mythical agreement with them.  Except the 15 people who won, had a dollar in on the pot (1 of them by proxy), and the 4 who weren't included didn't.  So by actions, that tells me the majority of the players knew that you had to be "in it, to win it".  And the other 4 didn't want to be in enough to make sure they were, until after it had been won.  So we can assume by the majority of 15 out of 19 being included in the winnings that you had to put in a dollar to included by their verbal agreement.  Now if previous winnings (if they exist) were used, and they were contributors to the previous winnings.  Then yes I agree they should have some share of the winning pot, but not an equal share.  Because who in their right mind is going to make a verbal agreement where anyone can not pay at any time, but still take an equal share of the winnings whether or not they helped purchased tickets?  That's crazy.

                            LottoPools's avatar - bee
                            Houston, TX
                            United States
                            Member #4496
                            April 29, 2004
                            71 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: January 10, 2009, 8:10 pm - IP Logged

                            I called this one on an earlier post.

                            I run two lottery pools (a MM and a PB), each of which will last about a year.  When I first started running pools, I left myself open to a lot of problems; luckily, we never won.  From reading about lawsuits on this site, I made up a list of rules that you have to agree to if you want to play in my pool.  The rules are on a buy-in receipt that you must sign.  I update the rules for new pools as I hear about new issues in new lawsuits.

                             

                            The receipt includes:

                            • just because you are in this pool doesn't mean I have to invite you to join any other pools I run
                            • who's in the pool
                            • how much was paid by each person
                            • how long it will last
                            • who keeps the money
                            • numbers will be communicated by email
                            • numbers will be cash option quick picks
                            • everyone, including me,  can purchase their own tickets and any winnings on them are not subject to claims by anyone in the pool- although there is a stipulation that I'm protected only as long as I get the pool numbers out in advance
                            • small wins extend the length of the pool
                            • when a new pool is opened, new/departing people are reported
                            • when we win we will NOT be claiming the money immediately

                             

                            I may not cover everything, but I think I come close and I don't do verbal agreements anymore.  The people in my pools laugh at me because of my rules but I don't want to be one of those that learned the hard way.

                             

                            I even have a fellow LP member in one of my pools, even though we've never met (just talked on the phone and emailed).  He saw a post from me here and emailed me.  He runs several pools but I've only played in one of his.

                             

                            Lotto pools are a good thing if well planned.

                            ________________________

                            Playing together to make a splash in the pool of lottery winners.  It's just a matter of time.

                              Avatar
                              New Member

                              United States
                              Member #70142
                              January 25, 2009
                              8 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: January 25, 2009, 2:08 pm - IP Logged

                              Seems to me the best way to address this issue of pool "carryovers" from small wins would be to include in your rules that wins under $X will be donated to Y 501(c)(3) non-profit charity, instead of used to buy more tickets on the next draw. Buying more tickets just seems like a really bad idea, it opens the door for all sorts of ludicious claims.

                              And someone who is serious about operating a pool should form a corporation (with seperate bank account, etc) to operate the pool as this will allow one to avoid personal liability for any boo boos the corporation makes in adminstering the pool.  Joining the pool should include an application with intergreated terms and conditions, i.e. cash option or annuity, quickpicks or something else, powerplay or not, provision for disposal of small wins, cutoff time for contributions for the next drawing, activity of the pool, etc.

                              Contributions to the pool should be done with signed and dated deposit slips which upon reciept and acceptance by the adminstrator are acknowledged with a signed and dated reciept.

                              If you set the pool up correctly, it can be a great thing as you can buy far bigger spreads than one person can afford on thier own. But verbal agreements are worthless and unless someone does the proper bookeeping for the pool, a win is sure to result in a fight or a lawsuit or both.