Woman wins '100 grand', gets candy bar, sues

[blackice912 Veteran]

This guy obviously stole the "100 Grand" prank from Opie and Anthony and figured he'd be just as fine like they were after the whole prank.

[psybapunk]

he stated that she'd be "100 GRAND RICHER"

they should pay up.

[silver-dagger]

Well, first off before any legal actions can take place a judge should decide whether or not she is fit to bring any kind of lawsuit. I mean if you are that Fargin dumb you must be at least partially retarded, and hence not legally capable of making an informed decision.

Before you all go nuts, there are plenty of people with mental retardation that are great functioning human beings, better than some 'normal' people, just not this woman.

If I held a contest and said I am giving away A baby Ruth. How many of you would think I am giving away a little baby girl named Ruth? None would be my guess, but say you show up expecting a candy bar and I hand you a little girl... Can you sue me for not giving what your dumb ass assumed I was giving? I hardly think so. You can turn down the prize, in my case a little girl, this case a candy bar, but you couldn't get a judge to force me to give you a candy bar because your stupid, or "most people would be expecting a candy bar'. The world doesn't work like that.

So what happened to the judge that granted the lawsuit against McD's coffee? I mean if I order coffee then I expect it to be hot and if I spill it on me then I expect to be scalded.

[Ravager]

It amazes me how many people are providing ridiculous, invalid, and otherwise plain nonsensical arguements about this issue.

Someone mentioned winning a "Baby Ruth". They're assuming that a person would be just as easily duped thinking they won a real baby called "Ruth" as they would be thinking they won a 100 grand.

The difference between "a 100 grand" and "100 grand" is negligible considering our English language is spoken with so many errors in it these days that people let slide. Did you all know that, technically speaking, ending a sentence with a preposition is improper english? I'm sure you all don't care and do it anyway.

Point is: the radio station's intention was to dupe the winner of the contest. They did not make it clear that it was a candy bar and relied on the most popular meaning of the term. Their plan was to dupe the contest winner.

Anyone who calls the lady stupid for "falling for it" obviously doesn't like to think an issue through. The DJ also should have known the rules and recognized that the FCC has banned "false and deceptive contests".

The DJ was in the wrong, and the woman was suckered in. There was no way she could have guessed it was a prank, as radio stations have money giveaways all the time.

[silver-dagger]

THIS IS NOT BAIT AND SWITCH PEOPLE!

A 'Bait and switch' method IS HIGHLY ILLEGAL!

There was NO SWITCH!

I assume we all agree on two things

1- The radio station was giving away 100 grand.

2- The radio station gave away 100 grand.

NO FARGIN SWITCH!

Just because this dumb woman assumed it meant cash money does not make it illegal.

586109407[/snapback]

I agree I do not think it was a bait and switch but what I want to know is did they say that it was a candy bar???? Just because you and alot of other people know that 100 Grand is a candy bar does ot mean that EVERYBODY knows this. If they said "Win 100 Grand" and did not state that it was a candy bar then it was misleading and I would say misleading on purpose.

[Ravager]

I sure as hell would have no clue that the "100 Grand" was a candy bar.

I know it exists, but it's just the fact that the use of the term "100 grand" is most popular when dealing with money.

[mAcOdIn Veteran]

Well if he said he was looking at a duffel bag full of them I wouldn't think they'd have a duffel bag full of 100,000 dollar bills(do they even exist?) lying in a duffel bag in a radio station. That kind of cash is usually kept in a bank.

It's clear he was poking fun of the situation.

My take is that if he truly got fired and is no longer employed he probably thought it was a harmless joke, and it wasn't condoned by the station, because if the station manager or whatever had came up with it I'd assume the DJ wouldn't be so quick to take the fall. And on that regard I don't think a norma radio DJ who basically gets paid in peanuts and concert tickets should be forced to pay 1,000 dollars for a harmless, yes it was harmless, joke with good intentions.

[Ravager]

Well if he said he was looking at a duffel bag full of them I wouldn't think they'd have a duffel bag full of 100,000 dollar bills(do they even exist?) lying in a duffel bag in a radio station.  That kind of cash is usually kept in a bank.

It's clear he was poking fun of the situation.

My take is that if he truly got fired and is no longer employed he probably thought it was a harmless joke, and it wasn't condoned by the station, because if the station manager or whatever had came up with it I'd assume the DJ wouldn't be so quick to take the fall.  And on that regard I don't think a norma radio DJ who basically gets paid in peanuts and concert tickets should be forced to pay 1,000 dollars for a harmless, yes it was harmless, joke with good intentions.

586112697[/snapback]

What was the "good intention" here?

[mAcOdIn Veteran]

Comedy.

You're right he should work for nothing his entire life to pay a woman 100,000 dollars over a joke, that was actually fairly obviouse.

[Ravager]

Comedy. 

You're right he should work for nothing his entire life to pay a woman 100,000 dollars over a joke, that was actually fairly obviouse.

586112719[/snapback]

That's not how it works.

The station would have to pay at least a portion of the fine, too.

The FCC regulates stations, not individual DJs.

The station should have set strict guidelines which would have informed the DJ that such pranks were illegal.

[slang123]

It amazes me how many people are providing ridiculous, invalid, and otherwise plain nonsensical arguements about this issue.

Someone mentioned winning a "Baby Ruth". They're assuming that a person would be just as easily duped thinking they won a real baby called "Ruth" as they would be thinking they won a 100 grand.

The difference between "a 100 grand" and "100 grand" is negligible considering our English language is spoken with so many errors in it these days that people let slide. Did you all know that, technically speaking, ending a sentence with a preposition is improper english? I'm sure you all don't care and do it anyway.

Point is: the radio station's intention was to dupe the winner of the contest. They did not make it clear that it was a candy bar and relied on the most popular meaning of the term. Their plan was to dupe the contest winner.

Anyone who calls the lady stupid for "falling for it" obviously doesn't like to think an issue through. The DJ also should have known the rules and recognized that the FCC has banned "false and deceptive contests".

The DJ was in the wrong, and the woman was suckered in. There was no way she could have guessed it was a prank, as radio stations have money giveaways all the time.

586112662[/snapback]

^^^ Spot on, good post

[Aaron Veteran]

THIS IS NOT BAIT AND SWITCH PEOPLE!

A 'Bait and switch' method IS HIGHLY ILLEGAL!

There was NO SWITCH!

I assume we all agree on two things

1- The radio station was giving away 100 grand.

2- The radio station gave away 100 grand.

NO FARGIN SWITCH!

Just because this dumb woman assumed it meant cash money does not make it illegal.

586109407[/snapback]

Correct, bait and switch measn advertising an item or service and then not having said item or service available, "but oh by the way could I interest you in this model instead?"

This was not a bait and switch.

Exactly.  How often have you heard of a radio station giving away money?  Daily (at least where I live).  How often have you heard of one giving away a candy bar?  For me, never.

586109425[/snapback]

The "She should have known better" defense won't cut it in court.  100 Grand is a commonly accepted expression for 100,000$.  Plus, the specific wording of the advertisement promised the winner "1000 Grand", not "a 100 Grand".  The defense doesn't even have a case of ambiguity here, taken in the way that the radio station claims, the ad wouldn't have even made sense.  The station sacrificed grammatical correctness for a cheap marketting ploy, clearly proving that the contest was intended to be misleading. 

I hope the prosecution stomps all over that radio station.  BTW, the FCC will happily accept the 5000$ offering as a fine for violating its broadcasting rules.

586109455[/snapback]

She will without a doubt win her case. A judge will simply decide what a reasonable person would infer from the contest rules. Fact is that the 100 Grand candy bar is an ambiguous name, shared with another concept. There are reasons most of these staions have attorneys on staff.

It is alos pretty apprent that those who are scoffing at her purchasing expectations most likely haven't bought a vhicle or home themselves.

2003 Ford Windstar, about $10,348, on a $90k home, you would need about 10% down, so that is $9,000. That would leave her with about $80,000. Assuming she was failry poor to begin with, a spending spree could very easily be about $2,000 and they'd feel like they spent a fortune.

[Danny1810]

why has common sense died in favour of lawsuits?

[Grex]

WAAF in Boston did that about 2 years ago and the DJs are still on the air.

586108598[/snapback]

Yeah they are on XM now. Opie and Anthony

[Mike Douglas]

She will without a doubt win her case.  A judge will simply decide what a reasonable person would infer from the contest rules.

586113971[/snapback]

A reasonable person would also infer that $100,000 is cash would be a lot of money for a radio station to give away (the largest radio contest I've heard in my area is plane tickets), and they should probably pay more attention to the rules and wording of the contest.

[Colin-uk Veteran]

why has common sense died in favour of lawsuits?

586119705[/snapback]

Money.

[Hexicon]

I find it interesting in the fact that they treat their LOYAL LISTENERS (as stated in the website screenshot) like this. Say I only listen to one station. I am loyal and they pull a stunt like this on me. How many loyal listeners do they lose? I assume that many people found it funny but just as many decided that they would rather switch than be a part of this kind of tom-foolery (yes, I say tom foolery).

And wording is everything also. If I won a 100 Grand candy bar I wouldn't be RICHER, I would just have a candy bar. Now if I win $100 Grand then I am richer. Again, someone didn't think this all the way through.

[Fred Derf Veteran]

A reasonable person would also infer that $100,000 is cash would be a lot of money for a radio station to give away (the largest radio contest I've heard in my area is plane tickets), and they should probably pay more attention to the rules and wording of the contest.

586119965[/snapback]

Toronto radio stations can have prizes worth 10s of thousands of dollars on a fairly regular basis so US$100,000 isn't unreasonable to assume.

Perhaps in KY that is far too large a sum to be considered a reasonable radio prize. That would hurt her case.

[Aaron Veteran]

A reasonable person would also infer that $100,000 is cash would be a lot of money for a radio station to give away (the largest radio contest I've heard in my area is plane tickets), and they should probably pay more attention to the rules and wording of the contest.

586119965[/snapback]

I find it less likely that a radio station would intentionally decieve the listeners who are essential for their financial success (advertising revenue based on listener base).

Toronto radio stations can have prizes worth 10s of thousands of dollars on a fairly regular basis so US$100,000 isn't unreasonable to assume.

Perhaps in KY that is far too large a sum to be considered a reasonable radio prize.  That would hurt her case.

586121152[/snapback]

Clear Channel owns a lot of stations in my state. They were running a $1 million giveaway statewide, so I don't think $100k is unrealistic either.

[DrunkenMaster]

I think its ridiculous she should be allowed to sue. Is it only one the premise she told her children that they would be rich? Most children have no concept of money. To me, its like if I had won a prize on the station and then turned around and sued them because I wasn't happy with it.

I think the FCC has grounds for fining the station. This is clearly a case of deceptive advertising. I also think that the executive in charge of the promotion and those who helped out should be fired. They do not belong in advertising.

[Julius Caro]

I think the woman have it's right to claim her prize. I don't think she will be given 100k by court decision, but hey, if the radio station initially offered her 5k that's because they know the have made a huge mistake.

[Joswin]

Was this piece of audio already posted in the past pages?  I tried to skim and didn't see it.

I'M THE WINNER

586111632[/snapback]

:rofl:

Quite funny, but if it was me id also be saying something along the lines of what the "winner" said after he found out what the '100 grand' was.

A lot of people seem to be defending the Radio Station, if they are allowed to get away with things like this the problem will only get worse. Everyone and their mother will do it if they know they can get away with it... would that be a good thing? Having to read every adverisement, every bit of small print for everything to make sure what they say they are selling/giving away is what they actually say it is.

A jokes a joke, but imho she should get her $100,000 and the station should also be fined for the offense as a lession to other stations/companys that might be thinking of trying this to boost their sales/listeners.

[kirk26]

he stated that she'd be "100 GRAND RICHER"

they should pay up.

586112622[/snapback]

Yea, that's the part that stands out to me.

[Toxicfume Veteran]

What rules?

Take your emotions out of life and look at it logically.

She won 100 grand = candy bar.

That. is. it.

You can't be blamed for her stupidity. Who cares if it's a slang for $100,000? A person should know 100 grand is also a candy bar. The person should be careful, not the radio station.

586108884[/snapback]

I had no emotions involved in the first place, your point?

If you had to ask that question, I think you don't know much about how business marketing works, thus makes your point mute. there's no such thing as "who cares", it's business.

Read what I posted again..the fact that offered to give her $5000 shows they were in their guilty conscience. If they were so confident on their about their reward, they wouldn't even have made that offer in the first place.

[Malisk]

Bah, I wouldn't feel too bad for it because they didn't have actually any $100,000 to offer in the first place. Would be worse if I was somehow cheated from the grand prize, but this is just ridiculous... "OMG, I've been humiliated in public, sue!!"

If this isn't supposed to be allowed, stop them from doing it, but handing out $100,000 to her just for this prank is over the edge IMHO.

Some argues that if this is allowed people will continue tricking people, but look at it the other way -- if it's NOT, all kinds of prizes need to be very detailed what it's about, and if a guy finds a loophole in the description they can sue for thinking it was something slightly different. That's straight to further americanized suing behavior to me.

Read what I posted again..the fact that offered to give her $5000 shows they were in their guilty conscience.

Or to try save their face since they know how the legal system works with her suing.

Edited June 27, 2005 by Jugalator