Casino refuses to payout $1.6M 'Jackpot'

[Hum]

For about an hour last August, Gary Hoffman was a very lucky man.

Hoffman was playing the nickel slot machines at the Sandia Resort and Casino on an Indian reservation in New Mexico when he appeared to hit the jackpot: the machine said he won nearly $1.6 million.

"I became ecstatic," he said.

But the ecstasy was short-lived. Hoffman says in a lawsuit filed earlier this year that Sandia refused to pay, claiming that the machine malfunctioned. Instead, he said, they gave him about $385 and a few free meals at the casino.

"I won money, fair and square, and I've been cheated out of my winnings," Hoffman told ABC News.

The casino says it's not responsible for what it describes as a computer error and says it offered Hoffman the maximum payout of $2,500 for that particular slot machine. But, a jury may never decide who is right. Lawyers told ABC News that gamblers like Hoffman may have little legal recourse against Native American casinos, which sometimes operate beyond the reach of U.S. courts.

Hoffman, a retired Albuquerque city employee, was playing a "Mystical Mermaid" slot machine on the morning of Aug. 16, 2006, when he thought he hit it big.

The nickel slot said he'd won $1,597,244.10. Patrons and casino employees came to congratulate him. He even got a marriage proposal, Hoffman said. But, soon he was asked to come to an executive conference room, where he says he was told the casino refused to pay.

A casino employee "became quite intimidating with me, pointed his finger in my face and said, 'You didn't win. We're not paying you any money. Do you understand what I'm telling you? You're not getting any money,'" Hoffman said.

A technician from the slot machine manufacturer arrived at the casino within the hour and the casino cordoned off the machine.

"I was a winner and I walked out empty handed," Hoffman said.

A technical report said the slot machine's computer malfunctioned, and incorrectly made it appear as if Hoffman won more than the machine is able to pay out. The slot machine has a disclaimer that says it pays a maximum of $2,500 and warns that malfunctions void all winnings, said Paul Bardacke, Sandia's lawyer.

The technical report, prepared for the casino by Gaming Laboratories International, showed that the machine's memory malfunctioned, causing the slot to treat a losing spin as a winner -- what the report called an "erroneous jackpot." The machine manufacturer, International Gaming Technology, blamed the problem on a software program.

Bardacke said Sandia offered Hoffman the maximum payout of $2,500.

"If he had gone into a bank and deposited $1,000 and got back a deposit slip that said a million dollars, he doesn't get to keep the balance," said Bardacke. "It doesn't work that way."

"He knew it was wrong; he knew it was incorrect," Bardacke said of the "jackpot." "That's why he took a picture of it immediately."

Hoffman appealed through the tribe's internal review process but lost. Then he took the casino to court.

Jeremy Kleiman, the vice chairman of the commercial gaming subcommittee of the American Bar Association, said that courts normally look at the player's expectations when deciding disputes about gambling.

"The information seemed to indicate this was a stand alone slot machine with a maximum payout of $2,500," he said. "So when you sit down your expectation is to win no more than $2,500. This is not a fraud situation where a carrot was fraudulently dangled in front of a customer's face."

full story

[webeagle12]

I would sue, I would F sue and if I wouldn't won, then I set the whole building on fire. :pinch:

I would brake every funny bone in a person body whoever made that decision.

[Sethos]

Then they can claim machines are malfunctioning every time they win anything above 500$ ...

Give him the money!

[Colin-uk Veteran]

If the machine says you cant win more than $2,500 then i wouldnt expect that much whatever the machine said was won.

I dont see them doing this for every win over $500 because they wouldnt offer the maximum payout everytime.

I would have just taken the $2500 and be happy with it.

[Allan]

If the machine says you cant win more than $2,500 then i wouldnt expect that much whatever the machine said was won.

I dont see them doing this for every win over $500 because they wouldnt offer the maximum payout everytime.

I would have just taken the $2500 and be happy with it.

That's what I was thinkin' ... there are signs that say "Malfunctions void all winnings" ... he should have got a big, fat ZERO, but they offered him the max of $2,500. He should shut up and take it.

[Sheppard]

Why should he, that means whenever someone wins a jackpot Casinos can just claim "malfunction" and never have to pay out any large sums of money, its ridiculous.

[Allan]

Why should he, that means whenever someone wins a jackpot Casinos can just claim "malfunction" and never have to pay out any large sums of money, its ridiculous.

A technical report said the slot machine's computer malfunctioned, and incorrectly made it appear as if Hoffman won more than the machine is able to pay out. The slot machine has a disclaimer that says it pays a maximum of $2,500 and warns that malfunctions void all winnings, said Paul Bardacke, Sandia's lawyer.

Like automobiles, slot machines will (and do) have diagnostic chips and it's obvious you just glossed over the article, and did not read it. Read the green and red text above. The Casino did NOTHING wrong.

[shakey]

if the machine has it posted that the max winnings are 2500, then thats all he should get. Yes the machine messed up, but that roll could have been the jackpot. The casino did the right thing by at least offering him the max. The guy is obviously to selfish, and he is getting what he deserves now.

[Emile]

He would have no case in court.

[Quillz]

It's his own fault for not reading the disclaimer. Besides, the guy was offered basically $2,500 for five cents, seems like a good deal to me.

[Shof]

Why should he, that means whenever someone wins a jackpot Casinos can just claim "malfunction" and never have to pay out any large sums of money, its ridiculous.

Most casinos will also check the slot machine to make your win is legit and that you did not messed with the unit before they mail you your jackpot check

[neufuse Veteran]

I don't understand how the machine can say you won the jackpot then come back and say max $2,500 doesn't those two contradict each other? Why would you even associate a jackpot that is over the "max payout" which a machine that has a max payout less then the jackpot?

[Guest]

That's pretty good for getting $2500 for losing.

I'm sure many casinos go to some lengths to ensure they're parting with their money fairly.

[Alpha Drone]

Here's the thing-

Many slot machines have a notice written on them that they PHYSICALLY pay out no more than $2,500. Any payout larger than $2,500 is paid out by the cashier or management.

So, let's say the jackpot could be $50,000. If you win $1,000, the machine will pay it out itself. However, if you win the Grand Prize ($50,000), the machine doesn't actually pay it out, but flashes a light. Then the Slot Manager (or Pit Boss) comes over, verifies the machine is not malfunctioning, and then escorts the winner to the cashier, where he/she is paid.

[MGS4-SS]

I would burn the casino down. **** 'em!

[Jeston Veteran]

I work at a different indian casino in New Mexico, but I have to side with Sandia on this one. I think a lot of you are missing the part that says it was actually a LOSING spin that was erroneously called a jackpot by the machine. It's not as if he actually hit the jackpot and they are refusing to pay it. That's like me accidentally calling someone's A, 9 a blackjack. That doesn't mean he's going to get paid what a blackjack gets paid, because it's not really a blackjack! He should have taken his very generously offered $2500 and run with it.

[Hum]

I tend to believe there was a malfunction, however, I do not see why the machine would tell the player he had won $1.6 mill Jackpot, if it is limited to $2500.

Maybe they should offer him a $25,000 consolation prize.

The casino is going to loses at least that much in bad publicity. ;)

[Toology]

I tend to believe there was a malfunction, however, I do not see why the machine would tell the player he had won $1.6 mill Jackpot, if it is limited to $2500.

Maybe they should offer him a $25,000 consolation prize.

The casino is going to loses at least that much in bad publicity. ;)

It is limited to paying (not winning) $2,500 cash at the machine, is my understanding. Amounts higher than that would require you to approach someone at the casino.

[primexx]

the casino should have to pay him zero. the guy has no case.

[gigapixels Veteran]

I believe that the term "payout" being used in the article is throwing people off. The max the machine can pay is $2500, yes, but that's also the max a person can win at that machine. The last quote in the article specifically states that. It bugged out and said an incorrect value that you aren't even supposed to win at that machine.

[ANova]

I believe that the term "payout" being used in the article is throwing people off. The max the machine can pay is $2500, yes, but that's also the max a person can win at that machine. The last quote in the article specifically states that. It bugged out and said an incorrect value that you aren't even supposed to win at that machine.

If that is the case then there is something seriously wrong with the machine. To me it sounds more like the machine is only capable of paying a max of $2500 but as is typically the case the advertised jackpots can go much higher whereby the winner is supposed to get the money from a casino cashier. This sounds like a typical case of the casino trying to weasel out of the winnings. These machines are made to payout a very small percentage of the time so it's more likely the machine did malfunction and actually show the amount that is advertised, the article isn't very clear on this.

[curme]

It's his own fault for not reading the disclaimer. Besides, the guy was offered basically $2,500 for five cents, seems like a good deal to me.

I've seen a lot of people play slots, and, even with winning $2,500, he probably was still behind.

The weirdest thing I've seen are the people who put their car keys into the nickel slot, so no one will use their 'hot' machine while they get more change! :rofl:

[ozgeek]

If the pokie decides that he win that much (1.6m) then that is what he gets, no matter what is said. That is really rude. Being computers, you can expect them to fail and thus the customer who plays on them should be awarded the prize money that was awarded to them prior to the malfunction. I am not sure if a pokie can dispense $2500 at a time. That's a lot of coins! When I went on a pokie here, I won $50 and got told to see the cashier to get the money.

[Jeston Veteran]

If the pokie decides that he win that much (1.6m) then that is what he gets, no matter what is said. That is really rude. Being computers, you can expect them to fail and thus the customer who plays on them should be awarded the prize money that was awarded to them prior to the malfunction. I am not sure if a pokie can dispense $2500 at a time. That's a lot of coins! When I went on a pokie here, I won $50 and got told to see the cashier to get the money.

Well, at the casino I work in, and I assume the same goes for this place, we now use a paper system where a ticket is printed out with the total amount won on it that is taken to the cashiers rather than using coins.

And, as I said before, if I accidentally call blackjack on someone's Ace, 9, it doesn't mean I'm obligated to pay it as a blackjack. Why is a slot malfunctioning any different? Not to mention the fact that it is clearly noted on the machine that malfunctions void all winnings.

[Hum]

^ Yes, but the problem is, customers [rightly so] will suspect the casino does not want to pay-off if the Jackpot is too high.

They are not going to understand an 'electronic' malfunction. ;)