The $1 million winning ticket from Saturday night's draw was presented to Idaho Lottery officials for payment Tuesday, but the prize has not been paid out yet.
Lottery officials authenticated the ticket as being the winner and are in possession of the ticket. However, the ownership of the ticket is still in question.
"We are working toward a swift conclusion regarding this matter," said Jeff Anderson, Idaho Lottery Director. "We will have a resolution by the end of the week."
Lottery offices have been busy receiving calls and e-mails from players in the Treasure Valley claiming possession of the $1 million ticket.
"There are a lot of rumors on the street about this $1 million Powerball/Power Play ticket," said Anderson. "The Lottery is in possession of the ticket and once the investigation is complete we will pay the rightful owner their $1 million prize."
Internal Lottery security measures are in place to protect the integrity of our games," explained Anderson. "With this $1 million Powerball/Power Play winning ticket, our normal security procedures require further investigation. Once the investigation is complete we will share the details and pay the rightful owner their $1 million prize."
The Idaho Lottery is not releasing the name of the store where the ticket was sold at this time for security purposes, but the ticket was purchased in Boise.
The winning ticket matched all five numbers, 14, 18, 34, 42, and 43, but not the Powerball, 32 from last Saturday night's $142 million jackpot draw.
The Power Play is a multiplier for all non-jackpot winning tickets. For an extra $1 per play, players can multiply their winning tickets by 2 to 5 five times. On Saturday night, the multiplier was 5, making the normal $200,000 winning ticket a $1 million winner. During the month of April, a ten multiplier will be added to the game.
In addition to the $1 million winning ticket, Lottery officials announced two $50,000 Power Play winning tickets were also sold in Idaho for last Saturday night's draw.
These tickets matched four numbers plus the Powerball and have the Power Play option.
One was sold at Maverik on 27th and Fairview in Boise and the other was sold at Handi-mart in Post Falls.
"All these big winners reinforce the value of players selecting the PowerPlay option to maximize their winnings," said Anderson.
The announced jackpot for Wednesday night's draw is $165 million
Anyone have any idea why ownership of a ticket would be in question? I thought possession was 9/10 of the law, unless it was signed by someone other than the person trying to cash it.
Unless it was signed by someone other than the person cashing it, they should just see it as a bearer instrument. Phone calls from the area it was sold, pft!!
"Unless it was signed by someone other than the person cashing it, they should just see it as a bearer instrument."
Whatever cash you have in your wallet is also a bearer instrument, but that doesn't mean I become the owner just because I manage to move it from your pocket to mine.
There could be all sorts of reasons why there's a dispute, but apparently there isn't a single reporter who didn't think their story was finished after simply saying there's a dispute over ownership. Google news turns up a dozen sources, but they're just minor variations on 2 or 3 stories, and not a one of them says anything about why there's a dispute. The lottery is planning a press conference to announce the winner at 3:30, so maybe some details will come out. Then, maybe the lawsuits will start.
It could be that the person claiming the ticket also bought tickets for others too and couldn't decide which ones belonged to him until after the drawing. This has happened before and usually has to be investigated before the money is released.
Quote: Originally posted by LuckyLilly on Mar 15, 2007
Anyone have any idea why ownership of a ticket would be in question? I thought possession was 9/10 of the law, unless it was signed by someone other than the person trying to cash it.
Far as I'm concerned, the person presenting the ticket (and there is no implication that the ticket isn't genuine, according to the story) is the owner. THat person gets the million.
I the person bought the ticket for someone else, and now decided to keep it, that's life.
Never let anyone else buy a lottery ticket for you.
I just heard an update that 4 people are claiming the ticket that was sold at a Maverik in Boise, and the courts will have to decide. All 4 people have ties to the Maverik where the ticket was purchased the day AFTER the drawing. Customer bought $20 ticket, it wasn't right, so the store took it back. It laid there till the day after the drawing, then a clerk saw it was a winner and bought the ticket.
I'd post a link but I don't think I've been here long enough. I can't find the guidelines on that. Anyway, go to ktrv dot com and click on "Courts To Decide Who Gets $1 Million Powerball Winnings"
Quote: Originally posted by LckyLary on Mar 15, 2007
What is with Boise? Everytime you turn around there's another winner there. Are these all quick picks? Too bad Boise is about 50000 miles away.
In what part of the United States do you live? Boise is almost in the middle and I didn't think you could be 50000 miles away from it and still be in the western hemisphere as the crows fly.
Quote: Originally posted by LuckyLilly on Mar 15, 2007
I just heard an update that 4 people are claiming the ticket that was sold at a Maverik in Boise, and the courts will have to decide. All 4 people have ties to the Maverik where the ticket was purchased the day AFTER the drawing. Customer bought $20 ticket, it wasn't right, so the store took it back. It laid there till the day after the drawing, then a clerk saw it was a winner and bought the ticket.
I'd post a link but I don't think I've been here long enough. I can't find the guidelines on that. Anyway, go to ktrv dot com and click on "Courts To Decide Who Gets $1 Million Powerball Winnings"
Here's the story about the other parties:
"Two days later, the Maverick corporation filed a claim for the winnings. That same day, the clerk who mistakenly printed the quik pick showed up at the lottery office, insisting the powerball prize was hers.
She also presented lottery officials with a copy of Maverick's lottery policies and procedures --which state employees will be financially responsible for any lottery tickets missing and not accounted for. According to that document, it would appear that she would be the rightful owner. But that is now up to a 4th district court to decide."
The policy saying an employee is financially responsible for missing merchandise is illegal, but the ticket wasn't missing or unaccounted for anyway, so the clerk who almost sold the ticket has no claim.
Unless the store's policy on sales of lottery tickets covers this situation and the policy was violated I'd say the store is also SOL, but I'm sure they'll claim that they were the owner and the ticket wasn't for sale. That leaves the employee who recognized that the store had merchandise for sale at a price that made it a good buy. If that employee is awarded the prize it will be interesting to see what the IRS does. Since the deal to share was made after the ticket became worth a million bucks the IRS may believe it was a gift of $500,000.
"All these big winners reinforce the value of players selecting the PowerPlay option to maximize their winnings"
LOL! Yeah what they don't tell you is how much money this is costing milions of "losers" just for the one "lucky winner" to get the whole pot. I am usually disgruntled I wasted a dollar per game, I sure as heck ain't going to make it $2.00. I did enough of that on LFL and Match 6 so far, and now Mix and Match is following the same suit. But I feel as though I will win one of them very soon...
Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Mar 16, 2007
Here's the story about the other parties:
"Two days later, the Maverick corporation filed a claim for the winnings. That same day, the clerk who mistakenly printed the quik pick showed up at the lottery office, insisting the powerball prize was hers.
She also presented lottery officials with a copy of Maverick's lottery policies and procedures --which state employees will be financially responsible for any lottery tickets missing and not accounted for. According to that document, it would appear that she would be the rightful owner. But that is now up to a 4th district court to decide."
The policy saying an employee is financially responsible for missing merchandise is illegal, but the ticket wasn't missing or unaccounted for anyway, so the clerk who almost sold the ticket has no claim.
Unless the store's policy on sales of lottery tickets covers this situation and the policy was violated I'd say the store is also SOL, but I'm sure they'll claim that they were the owner and the ticket wasn't for sale. That leaves the employee who recognized that the store had merchandise for sale at a price that made it a good buy. If that employee is awarded the prize it will be interesting to see what the IRS does. Since the deal to share was made after the ticket became worth a million bucks the IRS may believe it was a gift of $500,000.
Except the eventual winner won't have any money left, cuz now it's all going to the lawyers.
This has lessened my opinion of the Maverik stores. I don't think they should be trying to claim the ticket. They got their $50k for selling the ticket, they need to butt out of it now.
Quote: Originally posted by pigsNtrees on Mar 16, 2007
Wouldn't the ticket be invalid, because the day of purchase has expired?
I don't think so, because the ticket was printed before the drawing. The store would be responsible for reimbursing the lottery commission for that ticket whether they actually sold it or not. Since the LC was/will be/requires that they be paid for the ticket, they have to honor it's validity.
That makes sense. So no matter if it was legal to make clerks pay for mistaken lotto tickets (the store has lost grounds here by their policy) or if the clerk bought the ticket, it seems to me the clerk should be the one who is the proper owner now.
Quote: Originally posted by pigsNtrees on Mar 16, 2007
That makes sense. So no matter if it was legal to make clerks pay for mistaken lotto tickets (the store has lost grounds here by their policy) or if the clerk bought the ticket, it seems to me the clerk should be the one who is the proper owner now.
There are two clerks involved, too. One who made the mistake (according to the customer) and would have been responsible to pay for it, and the one who saw it was a winner, bought it, and offered the manager half. What a mess! I'm surprised the customer hasn't thrown his/her lawyer into the frey with some off-the-wall claim.
As far as i know you cant buy a powerball ticket and exchange it. When the person took the ticket back from the customer it belonged to the store. If Someone paid for the ticket it's theres.
Since all tickets sales are the responsibility of the store. It should be the stores money. When the cashier bought the ticket the next day technically it belongs to the clerk. case closed.
Quote: Originally posted by LuckyLilly on Mar 16, 2007
There are two clerks involved, too. One who made the mistake (according to the customer) and would have been responsible to pay for it, and the one who saw it was a winner, bought it, and offered the manager half. What a mess! I'm surprised the customer hasn't thrown his/her lawyer into the frey with some off-the-wall claim.
LuckyLilly....the customer (or one who claims to be) has come forward. His story is that he asked for a $20 quick pick. Instead he got a $10 quick pick with a $10 Powerplay. He refused that ticket, hence the error ticket.
To make it more interesting the customer says later that day he went back to the store and asked for the orginal ticket (what we now know is the wining ticket) and got another ticket instead.
Quote: Originally posted by CA LotteryGuy on Mar 16, 2007
LuckyLilly....the customer (or one who claims to be) has come forward. His story is that he asked for a $20 quick pick. Instead he got a $10 quick pick with a $10 Powerplay. He refused that ticket, hence the error ticket.
To make it more interesting the customer says later that day he went back to the store and asked for the orginal ticket (what we now know is the wining ticket) and got another ticket instead.
The saga continues.
Holy cow! Has the customer filed a claim yet? I can't find anything about it at the tv station websites.
Quote: Originally posted by pigsNtrees on Mar 16, 2007
Do you think that the store's policy, irregardless if it is legal or not, forfeits the rights of the store to claim the ticket?
Yes. Especially if that policy has ever been enforced, which I bet it has. Maverik does not have the right to make employees reimburse the store for losing tickets, but take the jackpot of winning tickets.
Quote: Originally posted by CA LotteryGuy on Mar 16, 2007
LuckyLilly...check out the web site for the Idaho Statesmen. There is an article there that sums up the situation to date.
Thanks CA LotteryGuy, I found it now. I always forget about the paper.
That article says Maverik has eaten the financial loss in the past on tickets that were printed wrongly, so it's possible their official policy wasn't enforced. Darn it, I sure hope Maverik doesn't prevail on this one.
Quote: Originally posted by pigsNtrees on Mar 16, 2007
Do you think that the store's policy, irregardless if it is legal or not, forfeits the rights of the store to claim the ticket?
I think that what the store's policy says or doesn't say about what happens with unsold tickets may be the deciding factor in the case. Once it was refused by the customer the ticket became merchandise that was owned by the store, and it's a safe assumption that the store wanted to sell that piece of merchandise. If the policy contains a clause that would prohibit the ticket from being bought by an employee then the ticket wasn't for sale and therefore probably belongs to the store. If the policy doesn't prohibit employees from buying unsold tickets then the ticket may have been legally purchased and would therefore belong to the buyer. A policy that attempts to make employees financially responsible for tickets may result in a court finding that the store had no intention of becoming the owner of any unsold tickets.
Stores sell things for the wrong price all the time. If they notice before the sale is complete they generally have the right to refuse the sale. Once the sale is completed they have no recourse. Of course there's the possibility that the court will rule that the employee knew the store would not want to sell such a valuable piece of merchandise so cheaply, and that the clerk therefore acted improperly. In that case, if the clerk had sold it to some random customer the store's only recourse would probably be disciplinary action against the clerk. Since the clerk sold the ticket to themself the court may deem the sale fraudulent. Offering to split the winnings with the manager suggests that the clerk knew they may have been acting improperly and was attempting to get approval from a superior.
The part of the policy that tries to make employees responsible is illegal and unenforceable regardless of what they may have tried to do in the past. If an employee steals they can obviously be fired, criminally prosecuted, and possibly forced to make restitution. If an employee screws up, whether it's making the wrong sandwich for a customer at the deli counter, dropping a $1000 bottle of cognac at a liquor store, or printing a lottery ticket that's not what the customer asked for, the only recourse the employer has is disciplinary action or termination. In this case it's unclear why the customer refused the ticket, so we don't even know if the clerk that printed the ticket screwed up. Maybe the customer got what they asked for and didn't like the numbers on the ticket. Since the store had no right to make the clerk who printed the ticket buy it and that clerk (presumably) made no attempt to buy it that clerk has no basis for a claim on the ticket.
Of course I'm absolutely shocked and amazed that the original customer has come forward to try and stake their claim. Assuming the customer originally refused the ticket they should be SOL. Even if they came back later a store is generally under no obligation to sell somebody any particular piece of merchandise. Of course it's possible that the customer actually wanted the ticket but discovered after "ordering it" that they didn't have the $20 it cost. I put "ordering it" in quotes because there's a reasonable argument that an online lottery ticket is custom ordered merchandise that the customer is obligated to pay for. If that's the case they may have a legitimate claim, because there's a good argument that they owned the ticket and simply had to arrange for payment.
Quote: Originally posted by LuckyLilly on Mar 15, 2007
I just heard an update that 4 people are claiming the ticket that was sold at a Maverik in Boise, and the courts will have to decide. All 4 people have ties to the Maverik where the ticket was purchased the day AFTER the drawing. Customer bought $20 ticket, it wasn't right, so the store took it back. It laid there till the day after the drawing, then a clerk saw it was a winner and bought the ticket.
I'd post a link but I don't think I've been here long enough. I can't find the guidelines on that. Anyway, go to ktrv dot com and click on "Courts To Decide Who Gets $1 Million Powerball Winnings"
thx for the update........its funny cus sometimes I will ask the store if they have any tkt's ppl didn't pay for and I always buy them.....it doesn't happen often but i do ask.
Anyone have any idea why ownership of a ticket would be in question? I thought possession was 9/10 of the law, unless it was signed by someone other than the person trying to cash it.
Mabey someone said, "hey, get me a ticket while you're at the store, here's my numbers....." and now friendly neighbor, has other ideas.
Unless it was signed by someone other than the person cashing it, they should just see it as a bearer instrument. Phone calls from the area it was sold, pft!!
"Unless it was signed by someone other than the person cashing it, they should just see it as a bearer instrument."
Whatever cash you have in your wallet is also a bearer instrument, but that doesn't mean I become the owner just because I manage to move it from your pocket to mine.
There could be all sorts of reasons why there's a dispute, but apparently there isn't a single reporter who didn't think their story was finished after simply saying there's a dispute over ownership. Google news turns up a dozen sources, but they're just minor variations on 2 or 3 stories, and not a one of them says anything about why there's a dispute. The lottery is planning a press conference to announce the winner at 3:30, so maybe some details will come out. Then, maybe the lawsuits will start.
A ten multiplier is comming to Powerball for the month of April
Now thats something to party about!
It could be that the person claiming the ticket also bought tickets for others too and couldn't decide which ones belonged to him until after the drawing. This has happened before and usually has to be investigated before the money is released.
What is with Boise? Everytime you turn around there's another winner there. Are these all quick picks? Too bad Boise is about 50000 miles away.
Far as I'm concerned, the person presenting the ticket (and there is no implication that the ticket isn't genuine, according to the story) is the owner. THat person gets the million.
I the person bought the ticket for someone else, and now decided to keep it, that's life.
Never let anyone else buy a lottery ticket for you.
I just heard an update that 4 people are claiming the ticket that was sold at a Maverik in Boise, and the courts will have to decide. All 4 people have ties to the Maverik where the ticket was purchased the day AFTER the drawing. Customer bought $20 ticket, it wasn't right, so the store took it back. It laid there till the day after the drawing, then a clerk saw it was a winner and bought the ticket.
I'd post a link but I don't think I've been here long enough. I can't find the guidelines on that. Anyway, go to ktrv dot com and click on "Courts To Decide Who Gets $1 Million Powerball Winnings"
In what part of the United States do you live? Boise is almost in the middle and I didn't think you could be 50000 miles away from it and still be in the western hemisphere as the crows fly.
Here's the story about the other parties:
"Two days later, the Maverick corporation filed a claim for the winnings. That same day, the clerk who mistakenly printed the quik pick showed up at the lottery office, insisting the powerball prize was hers.
She also presented lottery officials with a copy of Maverick's lottery policies and procedures --which state employees will be financially responsible for any lottery tickets missing and not accounted for. According to that document, it would appear that she would be the rightful owner. But that is now up to a 4th district court to decide."
The policy saying an employee is financially responsible for missing merchandise is illegal, but the ticket wasn't missing or unaccounted for anyway, so the clerk who almost sold the ticket has no claim.
Unless the store's policy on sales of lottery tickets covers this situation and the policy was violated I'd say the store is also SOL, but I'm sure they'll claim that they were the owner and the ticket wasn't for sale. That leaves the employee who recognized that the store had merchandise for sale at a price that made it a good buy. If that employee is awarded the prize it will be interesting to see what the IRS does. Since the deal to share was made after the ticket became worth a million bucks the IRS may believe it was a gift of $500,000.
"All these big winners reinforce the value of players selecting the PowerPlay option to maximize their winnings"
LOL! Yeah what they don't tell you is how much money this is costing milions of "losers" just for the one "lucky winner" to get the whole pot. I am usually disgruntled I wasted a dollar per game, I sure as heck ain't going to make it $2.00. I did enough of that on LFL and Match 6 so far, and now Mix and Match is following the same suit. But I feel as though I will win one of them very soon...
Except the eventual winner won't have any money left, cuz now it's all going to the lawyers.
This has lessened my opinion of the Maverik stores. I don't think they should be trying to claim the ticket. They got their $50k for selling the ticket, they need to butt out of it now.
Wouldn't the ticket be invalid, because the day of purchase has expired?
I don't think so, because the ticket was printed before the drawing. The store would be responsible for reimbursing the lottery commission for that ticket whether they actually sold it or not. Since the LC was/will be/requires that they be paid for the ticket, they have to honor it's validity.
That makes sense. So no matter if it was legal to make clerks pay for mistaken lotto tickets (the store has lost grounds here by their policy) or if the clerk bought the ticket, it seems to me the clerk should be the one who is the proper owner now.
There are two clerks involved, too. One who made the mistake (according to the customer) and would have been responsible to pay for it, and the one who saw it was a winner, bought it, and offered the manager half. What a mess! I'm surprised the customer hasn't thrown his/her lawyer into the frey with some off-the-wall claim.
As far as i know you cant buy a powerball ticket and exchange it. When the person took the ticket back from the customer it belonged to the store. If Someone paid for the ticket it's theres.
Since all tickets sales are the responsibility of the store. It should be the stores money. When the cashier bought the ticket the next day technically it belongs to the clerk. case closed.
LuckyLilly....the customer (or one who claims to be) has come forward. His story is that he asked for a $20 quick pick. Instead he got a $10 quick pick with a $10 Powerplay. He refused that ticket, hence the error ticket.
To make it more interesting the customer says later that day he went back to the store and asked for the orginal ticket (what we now know is the wining ticket) and got another ticket instead.
The saga continues.
Holy cow! Has the customer filed a claim yet? I can't find anything about it at the tv station websites.
Do you think that the store's policy, irregardless if it is legal or not, forfeits the rights of the store to claim the ticket?
LuckyLilly...check out the web site for the Idaho Statesmen. There is an article there that sums up the situation to date.
Yes. Especially if that policy has ever been enforced, which I bet it has. Maverik does not have the right to make employees reimburse the store for losing tickets, but take the jackpot of winning tickets.
Thanks CA LotteryGuy, I found it now. I always forget about the paper.
That article says Maverik has eaten the financial loss in the past on tickets that were printed wrongly, so it's possible their official policy wasn't enforced. Darn it, I sure hope Maverik doesn't prevail on this one.
I think that what the store's policy says or doesn't say about what happens with unsold tickets may be the deciding factor in the case. Once it was refused by the customer the ticket became merchandise that was owned by the store, and it's a safe assumption that the store wanted to sell that piece of merchandise. If the policy contains a clause that would prohibit the ticket from being bought by an employee then the ticket wasn't for sale and therefore probably belongs to the store. If the policy doesn't prohibit employees from buying unsold tickets then the ticket may have been legally purchased and would therefore belong to the buyer. A policy that attempts to make employees financially responsible for tickets may result in a court finding that the store had no intention of becoming the owner of any unsold tickets.
Stores sell things for the wrong price all the time. If they notice before the sale is complete they generally have the right to refuse the sale. Once the sale is completed they have no recourse. Of course there's the possibility that the court will rule that the employee knew the store would not want to sell such a valuable piece of merchandise so cheaply, and that the clerk therefore acted improperly. In that case, if the clerk had sold it to some random customer the store's only recourse would probably be disciplinary action against the clerk. Since the clerk sold the ticket to themself the court may deem the sale fraudulent. Offering to split the winnings with the manager suggests that the clerk knew they may have been acting improperly and was attempting to get approval from a superior.
The part of the policy that tries to make employees responsible is illegal and unenforceable regardless of what they may have tried to do in the past. If an employee steals they can obviously be fired, criminally prosecuted, and possibly forced to make restitution. If an employee screws up, whether it's making the wrong sandwich for a customer at the deli counter, dropping a $1000 bottle of cognac at a liquor store, or printing a lottery ticket that's not what the customer asked for, the only recourse the employer has is disciplinary action or termination. In this case it's unclear why the customer refused the ticket, so we don't even know if the clerk that printed the ticket screwed up. Maybe the customer got what they asked for and didn't like the numbers on the ticket. Since the store had no right to make the clerk who printed the ticket buy it and that clerk (presumably) made no attempt to buy it that clerk has no basis for a claim on the ticket.
Of course I'm absolutely shocked and amazed that the original customer has come forward to try and stake their claim. Assuming the customer originally refused the ticket they should be SOL. Even if they came back later a store is generally under no obligation to sell somebody any particular piece of merchandise. Of course it's possible that the customer actually wanted the ticket but discovered after "ordering it" that they didn't have the $20 it cost. I put "ordering it" in quotes because there's a reasonable argument that an online lottery ticket is custom ordered merchandise that the customer is obligated to pay for. If that's the case they may have a legitimate claim, because there's a good argument that they owned the ticket and simply had to arrange for payment.
thx for the update........its funny cus sometimes I will ask the store if they have any tkt's ppl didn't pay for and I always buy them.....it doesn't happen often but i do ask.