Man claims half Lotto jackpot after slip with winning numbers was not entered

A CAR mechanic is claiming he is entitled to more than £250,000 "from the National Lottery because one of his play slips with…

A CAR mechanic is claiming he is entitled to more than £250,000 "from the National Lottery because one of his play slips with the winning jackpot numbers was not entered in the draw, the High Court heard yesterday.

The High Court President, Mr Justice Costello, was told the man submitted 32 panels of numbers on eight play slips worth £16 at a post office. But one play slip was not entered while another play slip was entered twice.

The man did not discover what had happened until he checked the winning numbers two days later. The jackpot on the Saturday night in question, January 9th, 1993, was a little over £500,000 and there had been one winner.

If the man's play slip with the winning numbers had been entered, it was submitted, he would have been entitled to 50 per cent of the jackpot.

READ MORE

Mr Stephen Carroll, married with three children, of Brittas, Co Dublin, is suing An Post National Lottery Co, which denies his claims.

It denies that the counterhand was acting as its servant or agent.

It pleads that it is stated on the playslip: "Before leaving the Lotto Agent's premises, check the numbers on your tickets to ensure that they are the ones you have chosen. Your ticket is the only valid receipt for claiming a prize and will indicate the draw(s) for which the ticket is valid."

Mr John McMenamin SC, for Mr Carroll, said his client operated a small car repair business in the Cork Street area of Dublin. He only had a bet occasionally. He might, if "flush", spend up to £20 on lottery tickets.

On January 9th 1993, he picked up some play slips at Cork Street Post Office and took them to his garage. He also bought a scratch card with which he won £2.

He went back to the post office bat lunchtime, and handed in four completed play slips, containing 32 panels. The price was £16 and he tended £14 and the winning scratch card. He was given the Lotto tickets.

Counsel said Mr Carroll admitted that he did not check the tickets when he was leaving. He put the receipts' in his pocket and left them in his garage over the weekend. On the Monday, he was told Saturday's winning numbers. He was not aware he had the winning numbers.

When checking the receipts, he noticed two of them had similar numbers. What had happened was that one playslip had been put into the Lotto machine twice. Mr Carroll thought he had won the lottery.

Mr McMenamin said the prize that night was more than £500,000. There was one winner. If all had gone well, Mr Carroll would have received 50 per cent of the winning prize.

On the Monday, Mr Carroll went to the post office and told of the playslips he had received. The counterhand from whom he had bought the tickets was visibly shocked and told Mr Carroll to go to the head office of the National Lottery at Lower Abbey Street, Dublin.

He spoke to a woman there who told him he was supposed to check the receipts before leaving the premises where he bought them.

In evidence, Mr Carroll said he did not gamble a lot. He might put a bet on the Grand National. He might play the Lotto when there was a big prize. He did not do it every week.

He did not look at the playslips and tickets when leaving the post office. He was not aware of any notices drawing attention to the Lotto rules and regulations. Nobody drew his attention to the rules and regulations.

After going to the lottery's headquarters on the Monday and being told there was nothing could be done and that he should have checked his tickets, he made an appointment to see his solicitor, Mr Padraic Ferry.

At that stage, he did not tell his wife what had happened. He went to his garage but was too upset to work and went to a doctor.

Cross examined by Mr Maurice Gaffney SC, for the defence, Mr Carroll said he had played the Lotto at Cork Street Post Office possibly four or five times previously. The machine was behind the counter. He was looking at the counterhand and so far as witness was aware, the counterhand put the playslips in one at a time. He was not aware how the machine operated.