Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 5, 2016, 11:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Lawsuits against lottery playes

Topic closed. 17 replies. Last post 2 years ago by Stack47.

Page 1 of 2
51
PrintE-mailLink
dannyboyhouston's avatar - lottery scratch_off_light_shirt-p235645499971128473gyb4_400.jpg
houston texas
United States
Member #130267
July 10, 2012
6300 Posts
Offline
Posted: March 8, 2015, 4:19 pm - IP Logged

I have recently scent an email to the Texas State Lottery Commission in regards to retailers suing customers over their winning tickets. It is up to all players to get their states to enact laws that would protect the consumer who won a lottery from any retailer.

If you want to catch many hits, cast a wide net.

If you are not getting any hits, then take your hook out of the water.

    Scratch$'s avatar - sm lottery.jpg

    United States
    Member #158848
    September 5, 2014
    294 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: March 8, 2015, 5:02 pm - IP Logged

    No lottery retailer should be able to claim any prize, nor receive any part of one. Period!

    Scratchers ~ Cash 5 ~ Powerball ~ Mega Millions

      Avatar
      wisconsin
      United States
      Member #130754
      July 23, 2012
      198 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: March 8, 2015, 5:11 pm - IP Logged

      If I ever won a "big prize", I would counter sue anyone that tried to file a frivolous lawsuit against me. Take no quarter, show no mercy.

        cbr$'s avatar - maren
        Cordova,Al.
        United States
        Member #104482
        January 15, 2011
        4881 Posts
        Online
        Posted: March 8, 2015, 5:49 pm - IP Logged

        I have recently scent an email to the Texas State Lottery Commission in regards to retailers suing customers over their winning tickets. It is up to all players to get their states to enact laws that would protect the consumer who won a lottery from any retailer.

        I Agree! to a point . More such be added to that law. The retailer got a check for selling the winning ticket. In all fairness, We always tell people to sign the back. If the agreement was really made at time of purchase, the retailer name such sign it before the person leaves the store that way both parties are protected. Before it is declare a winner. Plus a claws if you the retailer should decide to sue a consumer later and not show up to claim your share together then, with that buyer then bring proof also it happen. One more thing since you are claiming you own half the money, fine if want go that way, you only sold half a ticket therefore you the retailer are no longer entitle to the whole ticket commission check, half such go to that consumer.  This is just my point of view. No lottery pays for half a sold ticket.

          noise-gate's avatar - images q=tbn:ANd9GcR91HDs4UJhjxO7cmeMQWZ5lB_FOcMLOGicau4V74R45tDgPWrr
          Bay Area - California
          United States
          Member #136477
          December 12, 2012
          4106 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: March 8, 2015, 7:14 pm - IP Logged

          There is a lawsuit that is going to be interesting to watch and Todd posted the information under " Forum News"- it's about a retailer suing a player for not $20.00 but $350,000. Who in their right freaking mind gets involved in a lawsuit with someone whose job is STRICTLY to take your Dollars and exchange it with either a scratch off ticket or a lottery ticket? I can somewhat " understand"  if it was a shady guy who wanted to avoid paying child support, but a female entering into an agreement with a retailer. .screw that.

          I want this retailer to end up shutting down his liquor store operation for good. He is Bad for business as a whole. The California Lottery should confiscate his equipment whether he prevails in his lawsuit or not..

          People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it- George Bernard Shaw.

            Avatar
            Kentucky
            United States
            Member #32652
            February 14, 2006
            7302 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: March 8, 2015, 9:33 pm - IP Logged

            I have recently scent an email to the Texas State Lottery Commission in regards to retailers suing customers over their winning tickets. It is up to all players to get their states to enact laws that would protect the consumer who won a lottery from any retailer.

            You're asking for laws that just apply to lottery players that assumes all lottery retailers are cheats and thieves. Call your state legislators and tell us how you make out.

              Avatar
              Kentucky
              United States
              Member #32652
              February 14, 2006
              7302 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: March 8, 2015, 10:27 pm - IP Logged

              There is a lawsuit that is going to be interesting to watch and Todd posted the information under " Forum News"- it's about a retailer suing a player for not $20.00 but $350,000. Who in their right freaking mind gets involved in a lawsuit with someone whose job is STRICTLY to take your Dollars and exchange it with either a scratch off ticket or a lottery ticket? I can somewhat " understand"  if it was a shady guy who wanted to avoid paying child support, but a female entering into an agreement with a retailer. .screw that.

              I want this retailer to end up shutting down his liquor store operation for good. He is Bad for business as a whole. The California Lottery should confiscate his equipment whether he prevails in his lawsuit or not..

              Again it depends on the laws determined by state legislators. Apparently there is no law in California preventing a lottery retailer from entering into a written agreement over ownership of a ticket. Basically you're asking for more laws to protect ignorant people from making terrible decisions.

              "I want this retailer to end up shutting down his liquor store operation for good."

              If you have proof that retailer violated the conditions of being a lottery retailer, turn that into the California State Lottery. Do you know of any state with a law preventing lottery retailers and/or their store employees from playing lottery games?

              We don't get all the follow-up stories so we really don't know all the outcomes. In some stories, the outcomes are predictable, but this California story depends on how the court rules and the only evidence is there is a document convincing the judge to issue a restraining order.

                noise-gate's avatar - images q=tbn:ANd9GcR91HDs4UJhjxO7cmeMQWZ5lB_FOcMLOGicau4V74R45tDgPWrr
                Bay Area - California
                United States
                Member #136477
                December 12, 2012
                4106 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: March 8, 2015, 11:03 pm - IP Logged

                Again it depends on the laws determined by state legislators. Apparently there is no law in California preventing a lottery retailer from entering into a written agreement over ownership of a ticket. Basically you're asking for more laws to protect ignorant people from making terrible decisions.

                "I want this retailer to end up shutting down his liquor store operation for good."

                If you have proof that retailer violated the conditions of being a lottery retailer, turn that into the California State Lottery. Do you know of any state with a law preventing lottery retailers and/or their store employees from playing lottery games?

                We don't get all the follow-up stories so we really don't know all the outcomes. In some stories, the outcomes are predictable, but this California story depends on how the court rules and the only evidence is there is a document convincing the judge to issue a restraining order.

                Stack: As always,  it's an Opinion.

                I don't have Proof that this retailer has broken any State Laws: once again- my opinion. I can live with my Opinion, you can't live with mine especially my take on this retailer but that's okay because this is a discussion forum. 

                I would hate to think that this retailer sets a precedence where the rest of the country's lottery players get screwed over because of what the law makers in California say was Legal.

                If this crapsuit shows up in Kentucky- we hope to hear from you.

                People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it- George Bernard Shaw.

                  Avatar
                  Kentucky
                  United States
                  Member #32652
                  February 14, 2006
                  7302 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: March 9, 2015, 1:28 am - IP Logged

                  Stack: As always,  it's an Opinion.

                  I don't have Proof that this retailer has broken any State Laws: once again- my opinion. I can live with my Opinion, you can't live with mine especially my take on this retailer but that's okay because this is a discussion forum. 

                  I would hate to think that this retailer sets a precedence where the rest of the country's lottery players get screwed over because of what the law makers in California say was Legal.

                  If this crapsuit shows up in Kentucky- we hope to hear from you.

                  You're missing the point.

                  Your opinion is just as valuable as all the others saying "lotteries should do this and do that", but it's not the lotteries making those determinations. Most legal opinions are based on something resembling fact and there is nothing in that story that story suggesting Laxmi Kant Bhardwaj violated any California Lottery rules.

                  "I would hate to think that this retailer sets a precedence where the rest of the country's lottery players get screwed over because of what the law makers in California say was Legal."

                  The California Lottery's pari-mutual payoffs didn't set any nationwide lottery precedents so why do you think a California judge's ruling on California lottery winnings will?

                  "I want this retailer to end up shutting down his liquor store operation for good. He is Bad for business as a whole. The California Lottery should confiscate his equipment whether he prevails in his lawsuit or not.."

                  As I suggested before, show your proof Laxmi Kant Bhardwaj broke any laws or violated the conditions of being a lottery retailer to the judge that temporarily froze $350,000, half of the winner's after-tax prize. This is a real court case and not a hypothetical question asking your opinion on rule breaking retailers.

                  "If this crapsuit shows up in Kentucky- we hope to hear from you."

                  I won't be offering any opinions on hypothetical lawsuits. Seriously, what California lottery regulation did Laxmi Kant Bhardwaj violate?

                    noise-gate's avatar - images q=tbn:ANd9GcR91HDs4UJhjxO7cmeMQWZ5lB_FOcMLOGicau4V74R45tDgPWrr
                    Bay Area - California
                    United States
                    Member #136477
                    December 12, 2012
                    4106 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: March 9, 2015, 10:01 am - IP Logged

                    You're missing the point.

                    Your opinion is just as valuable as all the others saying "lotteries should do this and do that", but it's not the lotteries making those determinations. Most legal opinions are based on something resembling fact and there is nothing in that story that story suggesting Laxmi Kant Bhardwaj violated any California Lottery rules.

                    "I would hate to think that this retailer sets a precedence where the rest of the country's lottery players get screwed over because of what the law makers in California say was Legal."

                    The California Lottery's pari-mutual payoffs didn't set any nationwide lottery precedents so why do you think a California judge's ruling on California lottery winnings will?

                    "I want this retailer to end up shutting down his liquor store operation for good. He is Bad for business as a whole. The California Lottery should confiscate his equipment whether he prevails in his lawsuit or not.."

                    As I suggested before, show your proof Laxmi Kant Bhardwaj broke any laws or violated the conditions of being a lottery retailer to the judge that temporarily froze $350,000, half of the winner's after-tax prize. This is a real court case and not a hypothetical question asking your opinion on rule breaking retailers.

                    "If this crapsuit shows up in Kentucky- we hope to hear from you."

                    I won't be offering any opinions on hypothetical lawsuits. Seriously, what California lottery regulation did Laxmi Kant Bhardwaj violate?

                    Stack- l think you missing the point.This case is the first of its kind and most people want to see how it ends.l am looking at the larger picture. First off: English is her second language, it may be his as well but India was governed by the British for decades so he darn well knows it to a greater degree, he knew how to get her to " sign " some agreement indicating that he was savvy enough to pull one on her. Whether he broke a law or not is not the issue here- it's about him bringing a case again her when he did not buy the ticket for her.His bad for business. It would also seem that IMHO that he squeezed in a  "3" to the $50,000 making it look like 350,000. Is that punishable by law?..We shall see.

                    Have a great week Kentucky. 

                    People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it- George Bernard Shaw.

                      Avatar
                      Wyomissing, PA
                      United States
                      Member #161050
                      November 15, 2014
                      301 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: March 9, 2015, 9:49 pm - IP Logged

                      I have recently scent an email to the Texas State Lottery Commission in regards to retailers suing customers over their winning tickets. It is up to all players to get their states to enact laws that would protect the consumer who won a lottery from any retailer.

                      I've long wondered why lottery agents aren't better regulated. Ticket disputes and other sketchy activity (saying ticket isn't a winner, paying out wrong amount, checking instants ahead of time / tampering with security code, selling instants out of sequence, playing tickets on their own terminal, etc) by retailers is nothing new. It seems by and large, lotteries don't seem overly concerned, and often treat agents accused of abuse with kids gloves.

                      However, ironically, this lack of regard for player safety may work to the advantage of lotteries in the long-term - the perceived lack of safety will encourage more players to utilize on-line lottery ticket purchasing / subscriptions saving the lottery money in agent commission payouts.

                        Avatar
                        Kentucky
                        United States
                        Member #32652
                        February 14, 2006
                        7302 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: March 9, 2015, 11:53 pm - IP Logged

                        Stack- l think you missing the point.This case is the first of its kind and most people want to see how it ends.l am looking at the larger picture. First off: English is her second language, it may be his as well but India was governed by the British for decades so he darn well knows it to a greater degree, he knew how to get her to " sign " some agreement indicating that he was savvy enough to pull one on her. Whether he broke a law or not is not the issue here- it's about him bringing a case again her when he did not buy the ticket for her.His bad for business. It would also seem that IMHO that he squeezed in a  "3" to the $50,000 making it look like 350,000. Is that punishable by law?..We shall see.

                        Have a great week Kentucky. 

                        I don't know all the details and if you know them, share so we're on the same page. There are people posting the store owner is guilty of something with ZERO evidence. Just some basic ordinary everyday speculation.

                        "Whether he broke a law or not is not the issue here- it's about him bringing a case again her when he did not buy the ticket for her.His bad for business."

                        The only difference between this and a lottery pool is the fact the store owner was part of a two person pool. And the only thing that will matter in court is if he can prove she agreed to split.

                        The College Basketball Conference tourneys will be on all week and I'll be hunkered down in my man cave.

                          Avatar
                          Kentucky
                          United States
                          Member #32652
                          February 14, 2006
                          7302 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: March 10, 2015, 12:04 am - IP Logged

                          I've long wondered why lottery agents aren't better regulated. Ticket disputes and other sketchy activity (saying ticket isn't a winner, paying out wrong amount, checking instants ahead of time / tampering with security code, selling instants out of sequence, playing tickets on their own terminal, etc) by retailers is nothing new. It seems by and large, lotteries don't seem overly concerned, and often treat agents accused of abuse with kids gloves.

                          However, ironically, this lack of regard for player safety may work to the advantage of lotteries in the long-term - the perceived lack of safety will encourage more players to utilize on-line lottery ticket purchasing / subscriptions saving the lottery money in agent commission payouts.

                          "However, ironically, this lack of regard for player safety may work to the advantage of lotteries in the long-term -"

                          The first thing I did every time I had prize winner over $600 was sign the back of the ticket. And to get paid I showed ID and my SS number. With my signature on the back of the ticket, I'm the only person who can collect the winnings.

                          State lotteries put their phone numbers on the back of tickets right under where is says to "sign the ticket". Is there better way to tell players to sign the back of the ticket and to call the lottery if they don't understand the ticket cashing process?

                            noise-gate's avatar - images q=tbn:ANd9GcR91HDs4UJhjxO7cmeMQWZ5lB_FOcMLOGicau4V74R45tDgPWrr
                            Bay Area - California
                            United States
                            Member #136477
                            December 12, 2012
                            4106 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: March 10, 2015, 12:05 am - IP Logged

                            I don't know all the details and if you know them, share so we're on the same page. There are people posting the store owner is guilty of something with ZERO evidence. Just some basic ordinary everyday speculation.

                            "Whether he broke a law or not is not the issue here- it's about him bringing a case again her when he did not buy the ticket for her.His bad for business."

                            The only difference between this and a lottery pool is the fact the store owner was part of a two person pool. And the only thing that will matter in court is if he can prove she agreed to split.

                            The College Basketball Conference tourneys will be on all week and I'll be hunkered down in my man cave.

                            Stack- l posted this tonight. It makes perfect sense to me, perhaps you could see it the same way... minus my playful banter end piece.

                             

                             ** She admitted to offering him $50,000- this guy "added" a 3 in front of the 50,000 & that is what is being fought about here. Who in their right mind gives a total stranger, in this case a retailer HALF your winnings? His trying to say that it is " her pattern" to give in 50% sums to total strangers, as though her 4 children don't need it,  which is why he said that she did not give him $100.00 of her original win of a Grand. He said she gave him $500.00.This guy lies lies like a dog.

                            l just hope that she has a great legal team that will dismantle this retailer's account of what actually happened. I wouldn't mind 2nd chair. Big Smile

                             

                             

                             

                             

                            Have a great hibernation..

                            People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it- George Bernard Shaw.

                              Avatar
                              NY
                              United States
                              Member #23835
                              October 16, 2005
                              3474 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: March 10, 2015, 2:00 am - IP Logged

                              I have recently scent an email to the Texas State Lottery Commission in regards to retailers suing customers over their winning tickets. It is up to all players to get their states to enact laws that would protect the consumer who won a lottery from any retailer.

                              <snip> straight. Nobody should be allowed to be a lottery retailer unless they're willing to waive their constitutional right to due process. If nothing else, it's a lot easier than making sure that nobody who plays the lottery is a moron.

                              This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.