BY JAMES SIMONS
The recent An American man who claims he bought a $63m lottery ticket is suing the U.S lottery operators for allegedly denying him the life changing sum of money after initially approving his ticket and congratulating him for it.
Brandy Milliner of Los Angeles County says he purchased a Super Lottery Plus ticket at a 7-Eleven in Chatsworth, California, on August 8, 2015, which matched the six winning numbers. Lottery officials apparently gave him a congratulatory note along with a photocopy of his ticket only to later backtrack claiming the ticket to be to be reconstructed.”
The story is reminiscent of the sensational story that occurred here in the UK only a week ago, where German native Suzanne Hints claimed to have accidentally damaged her ticket in the wash, in the process obscuring the date and bar code in what would require exceptional circumstances of an award by Camelot. However, in turned out that her claim lacked any substance when it was subsequently revealed that the rightful winner of the huge £33m ticket had been identified, leaving the 48 year old woman exposed and thoroughly embarrassed.
In what looks like an American version of the same story, the only difference here might be the fact that Millers has demonstrated enough confidence to hire lawyers to fight his case. He may be proceeding under flawed perception of the requirements to legally claim a lottery prize in his country of America, but even by the most pessimistic outlook, logic dictates that his lawyers will be expected to have pointed out the weakness of his claim if those weakness are glaring. Lawyers are generally believed to be capable of taking on any case if the money on offer for a legal challenge is attractive. But hopeless cases can be damaging t the reputation of a lawyer where he or she fails to point this out to their client.
This should be an interesting case in a country so familiar with the jaw dropping prizes being a key feature of their sensational lottery game.
