Gimme my 100k, Dammit
 

Woman sues over offer of 100 Grand candy bar

LEXINGTON, Ky. -- A woman who won a radio contest that promised the winner "100 grand" sued after the station gave her a candy bar -- a Nestle's 100 Grand -- instead of $100,000.

Norreasha Gill filed a complaint Wednesday in Fayette District Court against Atlanta-based Cumulus Media, which owns WLTO-FM in Lexington. Gill, 28, says the station and its parent company breached a contract to pay $100,000 to the contest winner.

Night host DJ Slick sponsored the station's contest to "win 100 grand," Gill said in the lawsuit. Gill won by listening to the radio show for several hours and being the 10th caller at a specified time.

She went to the radio station the next morning to pick up her prize, but was asked to return later. When she got home, she found that the station manager had left a message explaining she had won a 100 Grand candy bar, not money. Later, he offered her $5,000, Gill said.

"I said I wanted $95,000 more," she said. "Nobody would watch and listen for two hours for a candy bar."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:crazy: :rolleyes: :crazy:

People have way too much entitlement. She thinks listening to a radio station for two hours entitles her to 100K - in dollars? Well, maybe if it w as a [c]rap radio station... :lol:

:shakes head:

I think her case is stronger after the DJ offered her $5000.

Not sure I am a fan of the stupid trick that the station pulled, not sure she deserves the 100 grand (money not the bar) either, but after offering 5g's i think she may get more if she takes them to court.

Wait I have a kidney I would like to donate...........oh wait its only a kidney bean. yup, not funny to be teased with something like that.

This reminds me of the story where a girl won a "free Toyota".

When she arrived at the radio station, they offered her a small toy of the Star Wars character Yoda. Toyota. Toy Yoda. Get it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1463528.stm

She won in the end.

Americans are a bit overly litigious really. What is it with you guys?! :)


Mr Mephisto

Similar to the stunt Pepsi pulled a few years ago... collect points to trade in for prizes. The commercial showed a Harrier jet for some ridiculous amount of points. Some kid and his buddies started collecting points to take a run at the jet until they were told it was just part of the advertising. I think they wound up settling out of court.

Without listening to the station and EXACTLY how the promo was advertised, I can't make a true decision whether this woman should have known better (was the word "dollars" ever used?) or deserves the money. It is a pretty cheap stunt though and the station deserves the bad publicity it's going to get.

-Mikey

I disagree. The article about this linked from FARK had a stronger ending:
ABC News: Woman Sues Over Getting Candy and Not Cash
That seems to be the same thing as they are trying to pull here. Pay up.

well i have a hyperthetical one for yaz...

say the radio station didnt have the cash. do they go into liquidation just to pay her the extra $95,000?

i really do think shes being ungrateful. i dont think the station was deceptive, misleading or false. its all about what someone percieves or interprets the prize would be. shes at fault as much as anyone.

I would take the candy bar, and eat it. It's still more then nothing.
I don't see how they mislead anyone, they offered 100 grand, and that's what she got. If they never said anything about actual cash or dollars, how can she sue for being mislead when they are honestly offering 100 grand. On the other hand, I'd be pretty pissed off if they gave me a candy bar when I showed up. I would probably shove it down the guys throat. Uppity DJs

This is the entire story off the msnbc.com website. I think this lady has a good case & I think I would file suit also.

Woman Sues Radio Station After Receiving Candy Bar As Prize In Contest

WLEX-TV(AP) -- A woman who won a radio contest has sued after the station tried to award her a candy bar instead of cash.

Norreasha Gill filed a complaint Wednesday in Fayette District Court against Atlanta-based Cumulus Media Inc., which owns WLTO-102.5 FM in Lexington. Gill says the station and its parent company breached a contract to pay $100,000 after a contest prize was revealed to be a Nestle's 100 Grand.

Gill said in the suit that night host DJ Slick sponsored a contest to "win 100 grand." Gill, 28, won the contest by listening to the radio show throughout the night and being the 10th caller.

Before the family went to bed, Gill promised her children - ages 1, 5 and 11 - that they'd have a minivan, a shopping spree, a savings account and a home with a back yard.

She went to the radio station the next morning to pick up her prize, but was asked to return later when DJ Slick would be in the office. When she got home, though, the station manager had left a message explaining that she had won a 100 Grand candy bar, not money. Later, he offered her $5,000, Gill said.

"I said I wanted $95,000 more," she said. "Nobody would watch and listen for two hours for a candy bar.

"What hurts me is they were going to get me in front of my children, all dressed up, and hand me a candy bar, after all those promises I made to them. You just don't do that to people," she told the Lexington Herald-Leader.

DJ Slick, who was not named in the lawsuit, did not return an e-mail from the newspaper. WLTO and Cumulus declined to comment, identify the DJ by his given name or say whether anybody was fired because of the incident. The host said on his Web site that he had left his job at the radio station.

Experts said Gill's case will rely on state contract law but the radio station also could face actions by the Federal Communications Commission, which licenses radio stations.

FCC regulations say contest descriptions can't be false, misleading or deceptive and that stations must conduct contests as advertised. Stations in two other states have been fined for contests that told listeners they'd won cash prizes without specifying they were in Italian or Turkish lira, not U.S. dollars.

In November, another Cumulus-owned station pulled a hoax that flooded county government offices with calls. The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council threatened to file an FCC complaint, but did not after the morning show hosts apologized and were temporarily suspended.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8330609/


It is deceptive and misleading if someone can assume they have won $100,000 instead of a 55 cent candy bar (depending on where you live). Can you explain why she is ungrateful and at fault? Companies have been put out of business by lawsuits before so I don't see why this is any different. They tried to punk this lady. If I were her I would try to double my winnings.

I think I remember this episode. Bart chose the elephant so in the end, KBBL had to cough up an elephant. I sure hope good ol' Stampy is doing okay on that wildlife preserve.

To bad you can't be an asshole without getting sued anymore.

The thing is it appears the station made the promotion look like the winner would get 100 grand which in common parlance would translate to one hundred thousand dollars. I'm sure the jock really hyped the contest as well. The reason laws are in place to prevent this is to provide a fair ground of competition with other stations. Lets say you own station WSUX and you are in an important ratings period. You are running a close second to station WBAM. You promote a contest where you appear to be giving away a LARGE sum of money. You draw listeners away from WBAM with your big money promotion and get the higer ratings. You can raise your advertising rates an your station is the big winner in the market. The only thing is you never had one hundred thousand dollars to give away. You used deceitful practices to compete in the marketplace and artificially increased ratings with resources you never had. This will not do. The station should be fined and the complaintant should get a substantial settlement.

Why would you want to?

-Mikey

Sorry forgot the sarcasm tags :rolleyes:

This kind of thing happens a lot. I remember a tv show, 20/20 or one of those John Stossel specials that featured a bit on radio station pranks. One had "Britney Spears" coming to the radio station, advertised for a couple of weeks. Fans showed up in droves, especially pre-teen girls. One girl was injured when the limo carrying "Britney Spears" showed up and the crowd rushed to get to see her get out. It was a Britney Spears doll.

A second promotion covered was a radio station that advertised they would be throwing "hundred dollar bills" off the roof of the station. A crowd gathered prepared to get their free money only to have invoices requesting payment of $100 thrown instead of money.

While the duration of the contest here was much too short and the contest much too easy to win to merit that size prize, the intent was clearly to decieve listeners into believing that the prize was $100,000, regardless of the actual wording. I'd even say that the wording would have to be a lie of omission--100 grand instead of a hundred grand bar--for the ruse to be effective.

Sounds like it depends on what the definition of "is" is.

Or the definition of "sex," since the woman got screwed. :p

Maybe I'm just cynical but I would have expected the candy bar. It seems like every other time I go to my bank some loan officer or whoever is giving me a 100 grand bar with their business card so I'm conditioned to equating 100 grand with candy. Especially knowing what obnoxious jackasses the average radio personality is anymore, and I wouldn't have expected the money.

How can anyone honestly say the whole purpose of this contest was not to decieve the audience and make the winner feel stupid? Check out The Smoking Gun. There is a screencap of a blog posting by DJ Slick containing the following:

Since only 7 of you will actually be tuned in tonight and the rest of the nation's eyeballs glued to the IDOL finale, Hot 102 is showing our appreciation to our loyal listeners with a change to win 100 GRAND!!! It's sitting in a bad to my left ready for someone to take off with like the Runaway bride! Here's how it's going to work: Right BEFORE Mr. Seacrest announces the Winner (or before he teases the audience with another annoying "After the break" bit be caller 10 280-1025 and you'll be 100 GRAND RICHER!!!


This isn't some case about some asshat spilling coffe on himself and then expecting to get rich. They advertised this contest with the knowledge that the only way people would tune in is if they thought they could win a ton of money. They knew that the winner would have to drive across town for a prize that isn't even as valuable as the gas they used to get there. They never gave any hints that it was a 100 Grand bar instead of $100,000 that might tip off people quick enough to get the joke.

You know that this lady had to have gone nuts when they told her she won. They KNEW what she thought she won. Did they bother to put her on hold and let her know about the joke? Fuck no, they let her show up and the studio and then they were too chicken shit to tell her the truth at that time. Instead they leave a phone message.

Maybe you think it's ok to intentionally fuck with people's lives, hopes, and dreams and then humiliate them in front of their families for cheap radio gimicks. I have respect for people and I'm not cool with that. I hope she wins a ton of money from them for this.

Well said, kutulu.

I tend to react rather strongly when someone uses abject humiliation of others for their own gain. To publicly jerk someone around for a cheap chuckle and publicity, especially when they deliberately hooked someone - they gave her the false world view of finally getting the chance to get her family ahead of the steamroller instead of under the fucking thing . . . I sincerely hope the station gets liquidated. Management that created an atmosphere where on-air personalities pulled this crap as an expression of station policy should get fined big time, and hopefully fired as well. I hope the lady a) gets her 100 thousand dollars b) a settlement for quite a bit more than that, and c) an opportunity to take a stand for all the folks that get fucked over by corporate fat cats bent on their own idle amusement.

Before the family went to bed, Gill promised her children - ages 1, 5 and 11 - that they'd have a minivan, a shopping spree, a savings account and a home with a back yard.

First of, she couldn't do all that will $100,000. after taxes she'd be lucky to have $67,000. Half of that gone on a minivan. After a shopping spree that wouldn't leave much of a savings, and certainly not enough for a home with a back yard after she blows it all. She's obviously a dumb bitch, and deserved to be treated as such.

She got her 100 Grand. Now go home and shut the fuck up.
I really hate how people think they deserve things to be handed out and not have to work for it. He's a better thing. Tell her to get off her lazy ass and do some work instead of listening to the radio all day. What a tough life this idiot has...... And I'm supposed to feel sorry for her? I think not. I wish I were the guy that handed her the candybar. They said you'd win 100 grand. And that's what she got. There was nothing misleading about it if they never mentioned anything about winning money.

So you think it's fair that this idiot puts a radio station out of business and probably leaves at least 15 people jobless and unable to support their families? Can you explain how that makes sense? She can still provide for her family, the radio station didn't take that ability away from her.

Thanks for tearing her apart like all the assholes on fark the other day. Jesus, why don't you rip her for being a single mother too or accusing her of living on welfare while you are at it? Maybe then you could get in a jab about how she must be a crackwhore too.

At least you did call her lazy and accuse her of sitting on her ass listening to the radio all day. If you RTFA, you'd see that the contest was between 8 and 10 PM, outside of 'normal' working hours. Obviously you must know quite a bit about her to make these judgements about her.

I guess you've also never heard of such things like used cars, down payments, or mortgages. The hardest thing to do when buying a house is getting a down payment together. Maybe a shopping spree to them would be 'blowing' $500 at Target on all new clothes for the kids.

The facts are simple and cannot be denied:

The radio station knew without a doubt that their stunt would only work if they knew that people would believe it was 100k, not a candy bar.

The FCC clearly outlawed contests that are misleading.

Ask 100 people what "100 grand" is. I'd bet that at least 90 of them would say $100,000 not a candy bar. Where the fuck do you think the name of the candy bar came from.

::sigh::

I agree with Maleficient here that this is just a case where people are too obsessed with their sense of entitlement. This woman was just plain stupid and/or ignorant to believe that she actually won one-hundred thousand dollars.

It's not deception. They said that she won 100 Grand. She recieved 100 Grand. End of story. Now, if they gave her a 3 Muskateers, that'd be something different :crazy:

Personally, if I were the radio station, I'd sue her for slander. She recieved what they told her she would recieve. It was only in her own mind that she derived the meaning of "100 Grand" to be money. Never in their promotion was the word "money", "cash", "dollars", etc. mentioned.

Exactly. :thumbsup:

If you want to disect what they said and that their description should not lead people to believe that it was cash instead of candy then why say you'll be '100 grand richer' instead of 'a 100 grand bar richer?

You honestly think that people would listed for hours and then drive to the station to pick up a prize that is worth less than a dollar?

The law has routinely sided with the plaintiff in these matters. Look at the Toy Yoda case or the Turkish Millionaire for examples.

People who honestly think they can get something for nothing -- get what they deserve.. She wants 100K -- work for it -Set an example for her children. Teach them that hard work gets you somewhere in life - not listening to the radio - and not suing and whining when something doesn't go her way.

She didn't do anything for that 100K - except listen to an dj named slick - (that should have told her something) that's not worth 100K - that's maybe worth a candy bar...

It's not like she had the 100K to begin with - so there for she didn't lose anything.. Hopes and dreams - :eyeroll:

I have so little patience with people w ho think that they can get something for nothing- and that are so litigious when things dont go there way...

Yes, i am a heartless bitch...

As kutulu said, and quoted here, the station has created a problem for itself. If the resolution of that problem involves destroying itself to rebalance the situation - well, shit happens.

It was a contest, she won and the prize was not as she was led to believe it was. It is painfully obvious that the station wanted people to believe it was $100k and that they knew she expected 100k. Unless there were official details available stating the prize was a candy bar they were intentionally misleading. THE LAW SAYS YOU CAN'T DO THAT. Therefore it has nothing to do with your opinions about getting 'something for nothing.'

They probably didn't tell her the catch when she was at the station because those are the situations where people freak out and grab the gun in their car.

Would it be fine for a store to raffle off a 'new car' and then the winner finds out it's an RC car if the contest rules never described the prize as an RC car?

Yes -- as long as the raffle tickets were free -- yes...

it's getting someting for nothing - -no cash expended -- Winning is a state of mind... She won a candy bar -- get over herself...

I am very suprised at the people defending the radio station here.

They clearly lied.

Can you tell me they didn't make this contest just to have people beleave it was 100,000 and not a candy bar.

That is misleading, and that is illegal.

Case closed.

I hope she gets her money and then some.

Never assume anything... The woman assumed it was 100K dollars - did the station ever say that she would see 100K in cash? Caveat Emptor...

I'd love you to come down with that excuse to a gambler... I bet a a broken knee later you would think different... That's the exact point behind all contests, to win something the easy way goddamit!
Fuck The Radio!

I work too damn hard for my money to ever gamble - I KNOW that I cannot get something for nothing.. I KNOW the odds favor the house. COMMON SENSE says this...

I do work my ass off day and night as well, but hey, a 100 Grand for doing "nothing" wouldn't hurt me at all.

We Americans want to get rich quick! The only to do that these days is to sue!!

I hear you guys over there are picking up our habits anyway. Take my advice....

Don't.

Maybe this comment belongs in politics, but the above is exactly the way I feel about public assistance. And affirmative action.

Funny thing is, I'm on the woman's side. I don't see how anyone can say with a straight face that the DJs didn't make any misleading statements.

I guess it's because the radio station has a choice about whether to give money away, and the taxpayer doesn't.

/threadjack

Misleading statements do not entitle her to something she did not earn..

She won a candy bar... Give her the candy bar...

Let the radio station face crimimal charges, I really don't care all that much, but this woman is not entitled to one red cent... She's entitled to a candy bar..

Maybe they mislead her, but she doesn't deserve $100,000 for that.

She should have taken the FREE $5,000 and left before going this far and becoming one of those sue-happy assholes. $5,000 had to be worth listening to the radio for 2 hours. $2500/hr job.. I wouldn't mind that ;)

Now THAT

is how they get ya!!!!

They intentionally phrased it so as to give you the impression that you would win $100,000 cash, and it turned out to merely be a candy bar, and that's not something to sue for 100Gs. That's grounds for a fine from the FCC but not a lawsuit basically summed up with, "The japery related to that candy bar titled '100 Grand' led me to believe I was to recieve $100,000, I am therefore entitled to $100,000." That's a dumbass sense of entitlement. I would've taken the five thousand and been quite happy knowing they just basically paid five grand and one candy bar to get fined.

Wow... lots of good arguments on both sides.

We've got a couple of radio stations in town that have been known to give out thousands of dollars at a time, simply for listening. It always seems to happen at ratings time, when they want to be able to increase their advertising fees.

The people pay nothing... they don't even need to plug the station after winning... and they get the money. I'm sure that my middle-sized midwestern town isn't the only one that does this on a regular basis.

The radio station's actions after the contest seem, IMHO, to condemn them more than anything else. If they have done nothing wrong, why send the woman home rather than face up to their tomfoolery? And why offer $5000 in cash to settle if they truly feel they have done nothing worse than set a listener up for a joke?

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck.... :D

The only reason that the FCC ever sides with the plantiffs is that they want to cover their ass and set a precedent.

The radio station DID NOT lie. They DID NOT decieve. They delivered on what they promised. The listeners were the ones filling in the spaces and deriving that the "hundred grand" was referring to dollars.

The "Toy Yoda" boardered on deception, but I would still have sided with the radio station due to the fact that they never promised a "car".

It's plain English here, people. Assumptions and estimations are not fact. The radio station is not at fault, they should pay no damages, and the woman should be forced to pay the $5000 back. She's an ungrateful, lazy, ignorant person who deserves nothing more than what is fairly hers.

So if you walked into Vegas and spun a roulette wheel that advertised a "100 grand payment," you wouldn't mind receiving a candy bar if you won?

judging by the direct quote from the DJ, she got what she was after. the definition for grand being $1,000 is a slang interpretation.

so, even if the slang definition is passable as valid, I would argue that it doesnt specify US dollars.

if I was the judge of that case, I would award the woman $0.00, but she would be entitled to keep the candy bar.

People in Lexington are stupid......

I don't think I've ever heard of 102.5 and I can get most Lex stations from home. There so needs to be a redneck joke inserted here.

ahhh....the power of innuendo and sarcasm.

i still rekon shes an ungrateful bitch. take it sweet on the chin and laugh about it with your friends in 20 years time.

besides, 100 grand doesnt get u much these days!

If it's too good to be true guess what people... :) The DJ's name is "DJ Slick". Come on...

She should eat the damn candy bar and get ready to go back to work. 100,000 large aint what it used to be.

Edit:

How ironic. I just turned on the local talk radio and they're going on about this story. Apparently now Mr. DJ Slick is no longer with the station, they won't reveal his real name, and and and they won't say whether or not he's been fired and if so for what. This is re-gawt-damn-diculous people. The goofball got a $5000 bonus for her trouble. That buys a lot of $100,000 bars.

Maybe I'm just overly sensitive to misrepresentation because I believed the ad that said I could get cell phone service for $39.99.

And all that means is 90% of people are dumbasses.

I assume nothing. I prefer to go by fact. I'm a realist, not a daydreaming idiot.

I think the chick needs to lighten up, but I *do* think there was misrepresentation in there somewhere... Like, when the station advertised the contest, did they say at the end (really really fast) that if one wanted full details, they should call the station? All of the promotional things I've ever seen come with small print or fast talk at the end. If the station was freely telling anyone who asked about getting a candy bar, then I'd say it wasn't their fault the woman took it at face value. However, if they didn't encourage the listener to call them for details, then I think it was misleading.

Either way, sueing about it is pretty stupid. It sounds like the woman is stupid too, because how the crap do you buy a minivan and a house with $100K? Of course, this *is* Kentucky....

It's not like she lost money, so I don't think she should be bitching.

The DJ didn't technically lie, in that his words were literally true. The wording was carefully chosen, however, to decieve, to lead listeners to believe something other than the literal meaning of the words. The woman who won the contest clearly interpreted the words in the way the DJ intended. He carefully chose his words to mean literally one thing, but to imply another. The law says you cannot do this. The woman is very likely going to get a pretty good settlement from this, though I suspect less than $100,000.

Well, I think that entirely depends on the jury. I suspect she has the possibility of settling out of court with 100,000 from the station, or in court with a settlement ranging between a Hundred Grand candy bar and a load of court fees or a lot more than 100,000. Especially since she has the law on her side about deception. I can see her winning a huge settlement based on a sympathetic jury of peers making a statement to the radio stations letting them know they can't get away with doing something like that.

-

Anyway, people who think $100,000 in reference to 100 grand aren't dumbasses.

Radio Station did seemto break the law, they should be fined.

The woman should take her $5k and shut the fuck up. She got a hand out. It's not their problem she "gambled" on winning the contest. She could have done other more productive things during those 2 hours. God damn sue-happy bastards.

Hey, Red Bull didn't give me any wings. Guess I should sue. :rolleyes:

This isn't a 'sue-happy' bastard, and she isn't an 'ungrateful bitch'.

I think it is fucking ridiculous to insult her. Are you just jealous that she won?

This was 100% meant to deceive; there is no question on this. If you think this joke wasn't meant to, well... we aren't supposed to insult others intelligance on the tfp so I'll stop here.

If they suddenly change the Florida lotto or any other state lottery... taking all the dollar signs off the advertisements. Then pay the winnings in beans, saying "we just had a number; there was no talk of dollars..."

The FCC should fine the station, the DJ should be fired, and the woman should be paid at least 100,000 dollars.

By the way, grand = 1000, and so does K.
There was a episode of “Married with Children” where they showed the blond girl being stupid for not knowing Ks or Gs (grand).

This is not some new street slang; it has been around long enough to be a definition.

10k = 10,000
100k = 100,000
100Grand = 100,000

Not knowing the candy bar “100 Grand” exist is more reasonable then not knowing what 100 Grand means.

heh what do you expect from a DJ named... DJ Slick

somehow even without listening to the DJ he reeks of used car salesman.

If it's too good to be true guess what?

THERE IS NO SANTA CLAUS EITHER! :D

Eat your candy bar. Be more than grateful that the station gave you $5000 for sitting on your ass and listening to the radio. Go back to work and enjoy the rest of your life. It's that simple.

I'm totally oblivious to the candy bar 100 Grand.

If it's a Nestle product then shouldn't the promotion/competition have gone something like "If you would like to win a Nestle's 100 Grand" or "to win 100 Grand thanks to Nestle" it would have been a bit clearer. Wouldn't the company have to endorse it's product in a promotion/competition, or sponsor the competition if it's cash?

Another funny thing is I've never heard of a radio station giving away that much money. $5,000 or $10,000 maybe, but never $100,000! (Not where I come from anyway ;) ) Any competition with big prize money here is not usually a spontaneous event either. Sometimes the competition can run for a couple of months. I wouldn't think it would be something held in one DJ's work shift?

I don't really know the in's or out's of the business, my point is, I would have been suspicious about the cash prize myself. I probably would have had a laugh at the candy bar and felt a bit stupid for spending that much time and effort listening, so then I would probably demand maybe a cap and a t-shirt as well.

I agree.

The DJ completed a verbal agreement for giving the woman a hundred grand. It's up to the jury and the type of court case as to whether the DJ's intentions will be used in the case. There's no reason to be a dickhead to someone on live radio. The station deserves everything it gets.

-Lasereth

Give me a fuckin break. People are dumbasses because they assume a monetary figure is really a monetary figure? You'd probably go down there and rip the building apart if it happened to you.

-Lasereth

The station perhaps deserves a fine.. .the woman doesn't deserve one red cent...

She's not out anything. If it happened to me (whcih it wouldn't because i htink radio contests are stupid) I'd laugh and be done with it... A normal thinking person would.

she shouldn't get the money, just a tasteless prank.

but...

the radio station seriously should not have tried to pacify her with the $5K, that could be seen as an admission of guilt.

the station could potentially be liable for false advertising. it soaks up the revenue generated by the increased listener-ship the contest provides without taking the associated risk.

She called and she won the contest, she deserves the prize of that contest. The price was 100 Grand. 100 Grand = 100,000 dollars.

The only reason I have ever even heard of this candy bar is because of this kind of joke.

They could have wrote "100grand" on a banana and handed it out as the prize and that is fine... by some of you guys...

I'm sure you feel the people who win the lottery also don't deserve the prize. But they won the prize, that is how it works.

100 Grand candy bars have been around for decades- - they used to be called 100,000 dollar bars... at some point they changed their name. Most people in the US would have heard of this candy bar.

Why is she entitled to anything... There are scams everywhere (I get scads of emails I get from the African dude who wants to give me millions of dollars a week, I get tons of emails telling me how to win a free Plasma Television, or an IPod or whatever, I get tons of emails telling me that I WON something...

DJ Slick told her she won 100K and she believed him... oh well.. here's your candy bad - go home.

Her issue is that she promised the world to her children.. .and even if she did actually get t he 100K (she clearly never considered paying taxes on it) but what she promised she'd never deliver to them... Granted housing in Ky can't be that expensive, but a car, a house, a shopping spree, and a savings account for 100K less taxes - yeah right keep dreaming lady.

The varying points show that the radio station violated the FCC rules. It has been quoted already but to show it again: Some people thought it was money. Others thought it was a candy bar. That shows me that the contest was deceiving. Whether she worked for it or not, she participated in a contest offering her a prize. She followed their guidelines and won. Now the station offers her a prize that, while correct in name, is not what they led the participant to believe. Under the same premise, I could sell a six bedroom, 4 full bath mansion with a pool, tennis courts and Corvette in the garage. I'm asking $3.2 million. Once payment is received, I will dig the Barbie Deamhouse out of the basement and mail it to the buyer.

As for the people who say, "If it is too good to be true, it probably is"....
How many radio stations out there host legitimate versions of this contest where the offer of money is real? Most of the ones where I live do. This type of contest is not too good to be true because it happens every day. Yet, I have never heard a radio station hold a call-in contest to give away a candy bar.

The US law system agrees that verbal contracts can be used as a formal agreement. When the DJ said he was going to give the winner one hundred grand, he led the winner to believe that it was money, end of story. The court system doesn't care what his true intentions were if it was a deceitful trick. He DID agree to a verbal contract on live radio and he broke it by claiming his intentions were misunderstood. A verbal contract was broken so this is definitely a law-worthy case. It's up to the court system to decide if his true intentions are going to count in this case. If they do, she might not get anything. If they don't, then she will get $100,000 as "damages" for a broken verbal contract.

-Lasereth

There have been at least two incidents on Ebay - the first during the height of PS2 popularity, where a person sold a playstation box for several hundred dollars. The person who won the auction -- received just that... the box the playstation came in... The ad said it was a playstation box... the person who won the auction made an assumption.. .Buyer beware... The buyer got what was advertised.

There was another incident where a kid sold pictures of a plasma screen television.. the ad was written in such a way that the kid who sold the picture wasn't lying - the person buying the picture made an assumption.. (and who the hell buys a 52" plasma screen television for 2K)

In both cases, the people got what was advertised... If they made assumptions, that is their problem, they should have been more careful. This woman got what was offered... a candy bar -- if she made an assuption - well... Sorry.

This woman was not sold anything. She was and is now trying to get something for basically NOTHING which sadly has become a popular sport here in the U.S.

Here's another shocker: A buddy of mine just told me there is NO EASTER BUNNY! AAAAAAH!!! The trauma of it all.... :eek:

But the Tooth Fairy still exists right? :D

E-mails sent out such as those are actually scams, done by criminals. This is a radio station which is a licensed, registered business. They are held to certain legal and operating standards, just like any business. That's what democracy is all about!

The FCC is put in place like any other standards association to make sure that business is practiced fairly and according to law. Simply put, the radio station did not do this. This isn't about getting something for nothing. This is about upholding a certain level of integrity in business practice, and not allowing deception to run free. The intent here was never to run a contest to give out a chocolate bar. It was done to boost the radio stations ratings and mislead people into thinking they could win a large sum of money.

Legitimate businesses don't scam people, CRIMINALS scam people. The radio station is a bunch of criminals, and I hope they get what's coming to them.

That doesn't entitle this woman to anything at all - other than the price she won -- a candy bar...

She's entitled to something for nothing and if it were up to me she'd get just that: A big fat Mr. Bluuutarski....ZERO POINT ZERO. In this case the radio station generously gave her a candy bar and FYYYVE THOWTHAND DAWLAAHS!!! Not a bad days haul for doing nothing.

Now let's fix this statement real fast...

The contest was for 100 grand, not "a 100 grand candy bar", but as it can go both ways (though I believe she's owed the money) she's equally entitled 100,000 dollars. It could go either way just as fairly.

She should break that candy bar up into little pieces and sprinkle it on top of her favorite ice cream and enjoy every free bite of it.

I don't think some people are really thinking about this clearly. SHE WAS TOLD she won one hundred thousand dollars. She went to get it and they gave her a fucking CANDYBAR. Radio stations in my area DO give away thousands of dollars in contests...it is not out of the ordinary to assume that it is a real contest. It's complete bullshit to try to gain ratings by lying to your listeners. Whether you want to smirk about the candybar pun or not, they did LIE to contest goers by being deceitful. That is against the law on many different levels.

-Lasereth

It depends how he phrased it.

If all he said was, "you could win 100 grand", then technically, it should really mean one hundred thousand dollars.

You can't win Snicker. You can't win Milky Way. That's poor and incorrect grammar. However, you can win a Snicker, or a Milky Way.

If all he said was "win 100 grand", then his wording wasn't decieving; it was incorrect grammar that would normally only mean one hundred thousand dollars. In the end they aren't playing a trick or prank then, but just lying.

Then after she enjoys her 100 Grand Sundae she should go celebrate by buying a new minivan, start paying for a house and then go on a shopping spree with her children.

Or she could go out and get a job and do the same thing and stop whining about being pranked... :eyeroll:

I'm willing to bet t hat NO WHERE in the contest did it say anything about dollars - they wouldn't be that stupid... She won what s he won - a 100 grand candy bar...

Frankly I'm sure we'll never find common ground on this matter, so I'm not going to try, but that's no reason to attack this woman. Where have you read she doesn't have a job? She's a single mother of three who has a small house, a car that's not useful for a whole family, and no money to fall back on. That's no basis to say that she's an unemployed dead beat.

Anyway, I'm done. I don't think there's any way around our differences on this matter.

But where in the contest did it say it was a candy bar and not 100 grand? I think it goes either way. I don't understand or maybe i missed the post/article, but where did it say she was unemployeed? or are you just labelling her because, assuming that since she wants the money she must NEED it, and not just WANT the money to top out her 401k's?

I personally don't gamble, or enter in any contests but if someone told me I had won 100 grand. You better have my name spelt correctly on that check when I get there. Shit only way to make this story better is the woman now suffers a non-fatal heart attack from the stress and the station has to pay her 1 million........

Defintely a very bad business practice as someone outlined above how it's bad for competing businesses since not the stronger that will survive but the less ethical. However, I don't see how the woman should get a 100 grand, although the company should still be fined heavily for it and perhaps even give the money to their competitiors.

I can lie and decieve by telling selective parts of the truth and so can many others. Havn't you ever heard that the best way to lie isn't to? Lying I can see arguing about, but it is painfully obvious they were deceptive.

The radio station purposefully gave the impression that she would receive a cash gift. They did this so people would play the contest. They also had intent of substituting the money for a candy bar of the same name.
They fully intented to misrepresent the contest, and in so doing, made money by increasing their listeners.
Their intent was cruel, although most of us would brush it off, that's not a nice rollercoaster to be on. I hope she gets her $$$ and sues for distress & suffering. Corporations think they can get away with anything.

If you think 100 Grand = Candy Bar
Then you would think 100,000 dollars = 100,000 dollars monopoly money?
They never said “real” money, and they never said “USD”.

There is no difference between these.

They are both not funny, and are both lies.

I only wish she could use asshat statements from fark too, and get even more money for mental distress.

Like the song says...nothing from nothing leaves nothing. Some people get it. Some don't. *shurg*

Have to come down on the side of the girl on this one- Cumulus broadcasting needs to learn to monitor their people and use some oversite- they essentially fucked themselves here, and based on the postings regarding what they can legally do, they deserve to get what hopefully is comming to them....

In a previous post, there was a quote and the word "richer" was in it. That settles EVERYTHING right there. Once you say that, you are abotu as close to saying dollars as you can be, without actually saying it. Station is wrong, she's right, she gets the cash. If I was the judge, I'd laugh at the case, too. Although, not for the same reasons you would. I'd laugh at the radio station, take about 2 seconds to come up with the "judgement," and send her out with the money.

The 'logic' thrown around in this thread makes my head hurt. I get the impression that if the station had said '100 in cold, hard cash' and when they got there they could pull the bar wrapped up in 2 $1 bills out of the freezer and it's all cool.

I think the people against her are just sick of lawsuits in general and nothing would be good enough. Either that or people are just plain cruel and like to laugh at another person's misery. It's so obvious that the station was implying that the prize was $100,000. Would they bother running a contest for a candy bar if everyone knew what they actually meant? They could have at least had the decency to tell her right away after she won that it was a fucking candy bar. The fact that they didn't do that shows that not only were they deceptive but downright malicious about it.

I guess I better make that the next time I interview for a job they say x dollars in US currency because you never know when someone might pull a fast one on you.

I love that you guys have no problem grouping the station with the 401 scammers that drain peoples' savings accounts.

What this situation really amounts to is that one individual decided to sponsor a contest on his own as a practical joke. This is really just high school or even jr. high school bafoonery that's now gone bad because the person who won feels a sense of entitlement to something that was never there to begin with.

I'll bet there were no official contest rules. I'll bet the station didn't know about it. DJ Slick was bored one night on his way to work, stopped to get gas and bought a two liter bottle of diet coke and Nestle $100,000 bar and all of the sudden it came to him ...* que the visionary music* ... Tonight I'm gonna give away one of these babies and make them all think it's what Homer calls DOH! The thing that buys my beer...

Was this a dumb practical joke? Yes. Was this something that Slick should have known better ... you bet. Would this have worked out better for him had I won this contest... absolutely! I'd have been slightly irritated at first like anyone else then I'd realize that I'd been had and then I'd laugh about it. Was this woman done irrepairable harm through this act of mischief? No. Not at all. Was there a breach of contract? No and I'll ask you what contract? Was she led to believe one thing that turned out to be quite different? Yes. And so what? She's none the worse for wear out of this and in fact now that she's pocketed $5000 for her trouble she should unwad her panties and accept this for what it is and move on.

It was a practical joke and that's all. Unfortunately Slick's winner is someone who feels compelled to drive a stake through his heart because she spent two hours listening to his radio show. I guess maybe it says something about the quality of his program.

You're right about that Norreasha. We would normally just do it for free.

The radio station said they have a contest, he told the rules on the radio. That was the contract. By your logic the radio station can say and do whatever it wants always. Every contest is fake, and nothing anyone can do.

When people talk to you they can lie all the want, no no, this will only change you 10dollars on your credit card.. nope we thought you knew in our office 10dollars = 1000 dollars. oopps sorry, no contract.

If you buy this computer we will give you a second for free! Okay I bought it, where is second machine, oh we gave your second to you a second ago, there.. we gave you another. HAHA jokes on you, sorry can't blame him.. he just works here and thought it would be funny.

Ramble ramble ramble, this was wrong, and they can't be left to get away with it.

fuckin greedy people. earn the 100 grand u hick! nothing comes free these days.

MMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

I hear the cows coming home!!!!

My thinking exactly. If any of the people here who think it was okay for the station to offer the candy bar own a business (which I SERIOUSLY doubt), I certainly wouldn't avail myself of their services.

"What, you started a bank account because we advertised free checking? Okay, bring your statement here and I'll check it for you. Yep, looks okay. Now pay your $20 monthly fee."

In the morning I heard a DJ on the radio talk about a contest to win 10 grand. He never mentioned US currency, just called it 10 grand. I guess I should call the station and make sure it isn't a 100 grand bar cut into 10 pieces.

After reading all this hoopla, I would say the following: Regardless of whether or not you like the fact that the woman is pursuing this lawsuit or not, or whether you would do the same thing, any misgivings you may have of a cynical nature, or your feelings about expecting something for nothing, the woman would seem to have a strong legal case. Ergo, the dismissal of the DJ, the offer of 5 grand (I do mean $5,000 btw) etc.

I personally do not expect something for nothing, but shit - if I can get it I'll take it. All you naysayers are actually telling me that if someone walked up to you on the street, and offered you $100,000 in cash right there, you wouldn't take it? Being as cynical as all get out, looking around for cameras, etc - you wouldn't take $100,000 for shits and giggles? Hell, I would. Try me.

Second of all, it's a bad policy, in general, to let businesses get away with this kind of shady misrepresentation, or questionable description if you will, for the reasons outlined by several posters above. That's why it's illegal. Think of what would happen if every business deal you entered into had to be meticulously torn apart, above and beyond the normal amount required for loopholes and whatnot within reasonably normal interpretations of the terminology used, but also to figure out how many different alternative interpretations could also be valid? Everything would slow down super duper fast. I'm no contract lawyer, but I know several of them - and every time this kind of horseshit comes up the plaintiff wins. The alternative is not acceptable. I doubt she'll get the full 100k, but she will win the case.

I'm on the lady's side but I don't think the offer of 5k should mean anything to her case. An offer to settle is not an admission of guilt or any responsibility. Nor do I think the DJ being fired means anything either.

The Smoking Gun has scans of the lawsuit filing, if anyone cares to see the details. I didn't find any other up-to-date info.
Radio Candy Stunt Not So Sweet - June 23, 2005

I don't think they're legally binding or anything, I'm just saying that they clearly dismissed the guy or arranged for him to quit to distance themselves from the situation, and the same with the 5k. I'd bet they'd be mentioned in court testimony as evidence that the station was aware that they had breached contract.

I'm sure they will, it wasn't a formal legal settlement so the Judge might allow it. But to me it shows nothing. All I needed was the DJ's blog posting and how they handled the situation.

i'm with the people who say if you want something you should earn it. in this case the radio station clearly did not earn the extra listeners their promotion no doubt brought in. if they had told listeners the prize was a candy bar then their audience figures, and therefore their revenue, would have been lower.

as for the woman, she did earn the money. just because she's combined a small amount of skill with a great deal of luck rather than sitting in an office to get her money doesn not mean it wasn't earned. if you're going to go down that road then you'd be paying boxers by the round and making paris hilton give her inheritance away. stop being so jealous and let her enjoy her luck!