Does $9 goof point to larger problems with Ontario Lottery?

Comment #19

jim695 — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 19:14:02 GMT

The fact that this was allowed to happen is unacceptable.

There seems to be a growing propensity for organized lotteries to take advantage of their players at every turn and, when they're found out, a simple Oops is all that's necessary to allay the concerns of suspicious players.

When something like this happens, a major investigation should be initiated immediately, and those responsible should be prosecuted, even if it turns out to be an honest mistake. This is the responsibility wit... [ More ]

Comment #18

LottoGroups — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 17:15:06 GMT

Coin Toss,

You are right. I stand corrected.

My response was about scratch tickets and then I added a general recommendation to combate retailer fraud. A lot of the recently reported retailer fraud concerned non-scratch purchases. Buying online would not help prevent scratch ticket fraud.

There is the option of providing scratch tickets online but then the terminal or computer would resemble a slot machine or videa lottery terminal.

Comment #17

Coin Toss — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 03:40:20 GMT

LottoGroups

The last sentence of your post prior to this one:

My recommended solution to OLG officials is to allow online purchases. It is much safer and efficient process and greatly reduces the possibility of fraud.

Comment #16

LottoGroups — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:08:26 GMT

Coin Toss,

Yes, I know the story is about a scratch ticket. That is what I referred to in my response. I never mentioned online tickets in my response.

Comment #15

Coin Toss — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 18:43:25 GMT

Wow and oy vey.

Wintariofan....there's is a lot of conjecture here on the board about lottery officials monitoring LP (if they don't, they in fact should), a side effect of that is anyone with some inside info being suspect . More than likely though they'd lurk, not post.

All...As for the her store comment, c'mon guys, that could be anything form just a choice of words to knowledge that most store managers in the area are female.

(I had a teacher in college jump all over me onc... [ More ]

Comment #14

LottoGroups — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 16:11:17 GMT

I wish to make two points.

First in reference to the question why does the retailer not simply scan the ticket to determine it is a winner. The procedure for redeeming a scratch ticket in Ontario is a two step process. First the retailer scans the tickets then is prompted by the terminal to enter the 4 digit code that appears under the latex. The 4 digit code must correspond to the scanned code (long code). For this code to be entered in error and also match the scanned code and come up a win... [ More ]

Comment #13

Wintariofan — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 11:56:06 GMT

Wow...Her store..His store....does it matter whos store it was.

I have followed Ontario's lotteries since I was a kid and grew up attending lottery draws. I still attend the draws and keep in contact with officials on a daily basis. Unfortuantely, I come across information that the public doesn't know from time to time. For example, did you know that non-winning codes and big winners on instant scratch tickets are the same. Back in 1990, Ontario lottery changed its codes so players w... [ More ]

Comment #12

cps10 — Sat, 13 Jan 2007 03:32:28 GMT

LOL ... I was thinking the same thing...just glad you said it, Rick

Comment #11

Rick G — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:17:07 GMT

Maybe I missed something...how did you know it was her store? The generic would have been his store.

From this post, previous posts and your member name you know a lot more about the Ontario Lottery than the players do.

But we're glad to have you aboard, Ontario Lottery official...maybe you can do something about your lottery. You're making headlines here and they've all been negative.

Comment #10

Wintariofan — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:49:28 GMT

I agree...I live in Ontario and know the OLG very well. I know that very rarely...once in a rare instance that it could happen on the retail level. The retailer must have or redeem another ticket from that Palmerston batch at her store and entered the wrong code to that same batch. Thus redeeming the wrong ticket that belonged to this other guy. It's extremely rare when it does happen. But that is clearly what happened, end of story.

Comment #9

Todd — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 16:53:59 GMT

I forgot to mention, that assumes that GTECH or whoever is running the system is not using sequential ticket codes, which would be a really stupid idea.

Comment #8

Todd — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 16:53:13 GMT

I hear ya, but I don't know if that would fly. Lots and lots of tickets get printed with very light text by retailers who are either clueless or lazy about replacing the ribbon. The scanners don't read light text very well, so many times retailers end up punching in the numbers. With the length of most lottery ticket codes, it would be tremendous coincidence to accidentally punch in a code that is actually a non-redeemed winning ticket. Almost as large odds as winning the lottery itself.... [ More ]

Comment #7

Rick G — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 16:27:42 GMT

This is a viable explanation and in fact, may have been the case. As you said, it should be made foolproof. For a start, they could direct the holders of winning tickets that can't be scanned to the lottery office for validation. The agent should not be able to do anything but scan.

Comment #6

KY Floyd — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 06:47:44 GMT

There needs to be a system to deal with barcodes that can't be read. I know every one here has encountered that while checking out at a store at some point. That could easily explain why a clerk might enter some numbers and not scan a ticket. That there's much chance that the number entered will match a different ticket if it's entered incorrectly is a problem. There's a reason that credit card numbers are long enough that every single person on the planet could have 100,000 credit cards witho... [ More ]

Comment #5

Rick G — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:31:23 GMT

The bar codes on all winning lottery tickets are scanned. If the ticket wasn't scanned it should not have been processed.

There are only a few explanations for this $9 fiasco:

1) An inept lottery organization making tickets with the identical bar codes

2) The lottery agent hoped the customer would throw out his $9 winning ticket so the agent could get a foot-long Subway for dinner

3) The ticket was counterfeited

4) An inept lottery organization that allows an agent to punch... [ More ]

Comment #4

LckyLary — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:11:20 GMT

This is a THEORY of what happened. MAYBE in another store they punched in (not scanned) a code that was one digit off but matched this person's ticket, OR it was somehow a stolen ticket or number. Maybe some unscrupulous vendors punch in numbers at random in the machine hoping one turns out lucky.

Comment #3

wizeguy — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 01:26:20 GMT

Vendor punched in a wrong code? Aren't they using scanners

Comment #2

konane — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 00:59:09 GMT

Comment #1

Rick G — Fri, 12 Jan 2007 00:55:39 GMT

This is an unacceptable way to run a lottery. It's not the $9. It is the integrity of this particular lottery that should be investigated. (Canada's version of Indiana

Does $9 goof point to larger problems with Ontario Lottery?

Lottery Post — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 21:33:02 GMT

When Ralph Landry finally wins the big one, he wants to know that the jackpot isn't accidentally given to somebody else.

But the 67-year-old retired Air Canada employee has lost faith after he went to claim a small prize and found out that somehow somebody else got paid the money in another town.

How does this happen? he asked.

The self-proclaimed lottery addict bought his daily dose of lottery tickets at the Daisy Mart on Dec. 27, won $9 on a scratch-and-win Bingo and then within... [ More ]