have any right to the 50k. What signal does it send to Children that
if someone else takes your test, the name deserves the grade.
Nope. And if the Father say's he didn't know, lock him up for fraud!
Posted on 08/15/2011 11:08:59 PM PDT by rawhide
An 11-year-old boy who won $50,000 for a miracle hockey shot may lose the prize because he switched with his twin before going on the ice.
Nate Smith stunned a crowd in Faribault, Minnesota, Thursday night when he fired a puck 89 feet down the rink into a tiny three-and-a-half-inch goal.
His dad had paid $10 for a raffle ticket that would give the winner a shot at the $50,000 jackpot.
The only problem was that it was Nate’s brother's name, Nick, on the ticket.
Nick had just gone outside when his ticket was drawn so Nate stepped up to try his luck.
But the boys’ dad, Pat Smith, came forward the next day to tell organizers the son whose name was on the ticket was not the one that made the shot.
Mr Smith said: 'I called back and said it was really Nate who made the shot.
'We thought honesty was the best policy, and we wanted to set a good example for our kids,' he explained.
Now, the ownership of the prize money is up to the insurance carrier that covered the shot.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
“Dead Ringers”
I hope they don’t pull the same trick with their girlfriends, that would be ooky.
Great story - but sorry. The insurance company will not make the payout. No way. Maybe folks can pitch in or something, but the name on the ticket has to be the guy who makes the shot. Clear-cut.
I am glad the father had a change of heart and did the right thing, after dishonestly sending the 'wrong' named twin onto the ice to shoot.
If it is indeed true that only the person named on the ticket can shoot for the money, then I feel the kid should not get the money.
I was also thinking that sadly because of this dishonest act, another ticket holder who paid $10 for the chance to shoot and win, if they were to be chosen after the named twin did not show up, well they did not get a chance to shoot and win. A little unfair if you ask me, especially after paying for that chance.
They defrauded the public, they deprived another paying person of an opportunity because the song was outside. Shame on them. They absolutely should not be rewarded for this.
I don’t know if it really should matter in the eyes of the insurance company. They insured the organization on one shot from no particular person.
On the other hand, the event organizers didn’t check for identity before letting the wrong brother take the shot; maybe the need to let the other brother come out and take the shot, because he was the chosen raffle ticket and they defrauded HIM by letting someone else take his shot.
Nope. And if the Father say's he didn't know, lock him up for fraud!
Wow, that was a trip down memory lane. Thanks. Those were great days.
I doubt that the insurance company, the company that will be making the payment, was getting any publicity at all in this scheme.
I guess I was thinking whoever was holding the raffle would get publicity worth the $50,000 maybe so they should just pay? And if it was a raffle, don’t they have to pay out winnings to some one? If not was it a legal raffle? Because if no one wins isn’t buying a ticket just a donation disguised as a raffle? Would they need to pick another person’s name and let them take the shot?
Well this was a charity event so I doubt the organization holding the raffle would have the funds to pay out.
And if it was a raffle, don’t they have to pay out winnings to some one? If not was it a legal raffle? Because if no one wins isn’t buying a ticket just a donation disguised as a raffle? Would they need to pick another person’s name and let them take the shot?
I think it would depend on the terms and conditions set forth in the published rules for the raffle.
It seems to me that the prize was a chance to make the shot which if you made it you won the $50K.
From the article I am guessing that you had to be present to win (you had to be there to make the shot). I also figure that if the owner of the ticket pulled had not been present they would have pulled another ticket and some one else would have gotten to take the shot.
Now the only possible way this could be resolved is the wild chance that they still posses the remaining tickets from the raffle. If they do they could pull another ticket and that person could try to make the shot.
But I sincerely doubt that could happen. Given that this kid messed it all up I figure that the insurance company will never pay up. I am fairly sure that their contract would have specified a drawing on a specific day at a specific event. That day and event are passed so they are under no obligation to pay out.
I don't see sending the "wrong" son out as dishonest. There was no reasonable expectation of making the shot, so the father was just letting the son who was there have a little fun by swinging the stick at the puck. He may not even have thought about the possibility of making the shot or about the "name must exactly match" rule, a rule that he had probably not read. It's probably more like a fun version of:
"Nate, take the trash out."
"But it's Nick's turn."
"Yeah, but you're here, just get it done."
Kids often get treated as interchangeable by the parents, especially when it makes things go smoother for others, whether getting the trash out before school or getting a boy on the ice to take a shot so the entire crowd doesn't have to wait for the right boy to get back inside for a fun shot that it expected to miss. And waiting until the next day (a very short wait)? Perhaps the organizers didn't give them a chance to explain without disrupting the main event, or perhaps they hadn't read the rules carefully. Perhaps also, they knew but had to think about whether to do the right thing (or chose to take overnight, because they knew what they would do but wanted the kids to learn from the thought process). Regardless of the reasoning, I'm pleased with the result.
Interchangable twin ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.