Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But why should she suddenly be entitled to $6500 when that's not what she won?
If the register at the grocery store charges me the wrong price for an item, I am refunded my money. I do not get to have all the money in the register due to a software glitch.
Because the machine said she won a huge amount. Sure, the $43 million dollars was a malfunction, but that doesn't mean she's entitled to nothing at all. She's entitled to the maximum payout the machine offers. Let's say she hit the BAR BAR BAR in the middle when she inserted the $2.25. (Whatever it was; I don't gamble so I don't know the ins and outs of winning slot machine combinations). She won the maximum, so she deserves the highest monetary reward from the machine. The casino does not deserve to get off scot free because of this "malfunction." She should tell them to shove their steak dinner where the sun doesn't shine.
The problem with the lame casino "malfunction" defense is that the fox is guarding the henhouse. The casino can say there is a malfunction whenever it wants, not pay out, then screw every casino patron. No objective individual ever verifies that it was indeed a malfunction; the patron has only the casino's word on it, and who has the most to lose by paying $10,000 or $100,000 to the customer? The entity claiming the malfunction, of course.
Because the machine said she won a huge amount. Sure, the $43 million dollars was a malfunction, but that doesn't mean she's entitled to nothing at all. She's entitled to the maximum payout the machine offers. Let's say she hit the BAR BAR BAR in the middle when she inserted the $2.25. (Whatever it was; I don't gamble so I don't know the ins and outs of winning slot machine combinations). She won the maximum, so she deserves the highest monetary reward from the machine. The casino does not deserve to get off scot free because of this "malfunction." She should tell them to shove their steak dinner where the sun doesn't shine.
How did you come to the conclusion that her "spin" on the slot was the equivalent of "BAR BAR BAR" and entitled her to the maximum payout? Are you privy to information that the rest of us don't have?
We can argue all we like but she's "entitled" to her bet back and that's it. The law is crystal clear.
The malfunction voids everything, so no she doesn't get the $6500 either.
She managed to find a lawyer with free time because they might throw some money to make them go away but there is no way they're going to establish a precedent that a malfunction entitles you to the max payout because there are machines where that is tens of millions. So giving her $6500 would open up a BIG can of worms.
My guess it the case doesn't even make it to trial and is dismissed.
Because the machine said she won a huge amount. Sure, the $43 million dollars was a malfunction, but that doesn't mean she's entitled to nothing at all. She's entitled to the maximum payout the machine offers. Let's say she hit the BAR BAR BAR in the middle when she inserted the $2.25. (Whatever it was; I don't gamble so I don't know the ins and outs of winning slot machine combinations). She won the maximum, so she deserves the highest monetary reward from the machine. The casino does not deserve to get off scot free because of this "malfunction." She should tell them to shove their steak dinner where the sun doesn't shine.
Or maybe she hit banana, banana, wild card, banana, and without the malfunction would have only gotten 10 cents. We don't know. But just because we don't know doesn't automatically mean she gets $6500.
Malfunction. I wonder how many "malfunctions" are in favor of the casino and they still keep your money? I wonder what your odds of success are if you drop a couple hundred dollars in a slot machine and then ask for it back because the machine "malfunctioned"?
Exactly. The odds are rigged against the customer before the customer even comes in. The customer puts money in the machine over and over, wins a little, but ultimately loses money. Until they win a jackpot. I wonder how many times customers win jackpots that are within the machine's capabilities and suddenly the machine is broken? It's so convenient that the machines are perfectly operational when the customer is shoving money in them; they only break when the customer wants money back
It's so convenient that the machines are perfectly operational when the customer is shoving money in them; they only break when the customer wants money back
Exactly. The odds are rigged against the customer before the customer even comes in. The customer puts money in the machine over and over, wins a little, but ultimately loses money. Until they win a jackpot. I wonder how many times customers win jackpots that are within the machine's capabilities and suddenly the machine is broken? It's so convenient that the machines are perfectly operational when the customer is shoving money in them; they only break when the customer wants money back
For someone who claims to never go to casinos, you sure seem to know a lot about how slot machines supposedly work.
And of course the odds are aganist the customer. Casinos are in the business to make money (like every other business). How long would these places stay in business if everyone walked away a winner?
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
I'd pay the 6500 just for the PR.
Yeah, then you would have every gambler and their lawyer claiming that they once had a malfunctioning slot machine and want their $6500. It is better for their business if they stick to a policy of only refunding the money put into a machine when it malfunctions.
For someone who claims to never go to casinos, you sure seem to know a lot about how slot machines supposedly work.
And of course the odds are aganist the customer. Casinos are in the business to make money (like every other business). How long would these places stay in business if everyone walked away a winner?
Yeah, then you would have every gambler and their lawyer claiming that they once had a malfunctioning slot machine and want their $6500. It is better for their business if they stick to a policy of only refunding the money put into a machine when it malfunctions.
Do they have 43 million dollar malfunctions that often?
If they do they better fix the problem because it ain't good PR to have incidents like this?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
