Scb11980 1st Gear March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 Man loses $910,000 lottery card suit against Singapore Pools 28 March 2012 Straits Times A man who sued Singapore Pools, demanding prize money of $910,000 on lottery cards he had bought, lost his case in the High Court on Tuesday. Mr John Berchmans had bought 91 Scratchit! cards for a dollar each, and his winnings amounted to $263. But he claimed that he had been misled into buying the cards because he took the words on them to mean that he would automatically win the top prize of $10,000 if he got three identical symbols in a row. The 69-year-old part-time housing agent lost the gamble when the High Court on Tuesday dismissed his misrepresentation suit against the lottery operator and ordered him to pay costs. ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unidentified 1st Gear March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 haha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mockngbrd Supersonic March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 idiot ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picnic06-Biante15 Supersonic March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 idiot ... Must thanks him cos, without him, I am still scratching those cards. Don't know how much I had lost leow ..... It just stopped suddenly, no more selling at S'pore Pool outlets. But now, its going to starts again ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewbacca 1st Gear March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 Moron lar. This isn't US or whatever sue-happy land he's from. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hulk 1st Gear March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 Man loses $910,000 lottery card suit against Singapore Pools 28 March 2012 Straits Times A man who sued Singapore Pools, demanding prize money of $910,000 on lottery cards he had bought, lost his case in the High Court on Tuesday. Mr John Berchmans had bought 91 Scratchit! cards for a dollar each, and his winnings amounted to $263. But he claimed that he had been misled into buying the cards because he took the words on them to mean that he would automatically win the top prize of $10,000 if he got three identical symbols in a row. The 69-year-old part-time housing agent lost the gamble when the High Court on Tuesday dismissed his misrepresentation suit against the lottery operator and ordered him to pay costs. Think he is trying his luck to see if can go through and got what he want. There are some ppls in this world especially sg that doing all these tricks, complaint for any reasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewbacca 1st Gear March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews...328-336196.html Hahaha, look at his face. Really KPKB face.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mockngbrd Supersonic March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 from winning $172, end up lose until cannot pay and lawya muz pay Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picnic06-Biante15 Supersonic March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews...328-336196.html Hahaha, look at his face. Really KPKB face.. I don't blame him, its his lawyers from SK Kumar Law Practice to answered.... As a lawyer, how did they not read the 'fine print' at the back of the card before advising his client whether can sue or not... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfT Neutral Newbie March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 I am surprise that a liar firm would actually help a broke with no case... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hub_n_mona 1st Gear March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 I don't blame him, its his lawyers from SK Kumar Law Practice to answered.... As a lawyer, how did they not read the 'fine print' at the back of the card before advising his client whether can sue or not... now they are in hot soup as the defendant lawyer lau kok keng has sued them for costs hopefully is the plaintiff who insisted on going ahead and not the law firm who gave poor advice Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hondafit2008 Clutched March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 i think is law firm give poor advise knowing will loss but still get the KPKB face guy to pay the firm at the end of the day win win for firm lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hub_n_mona 1st Gear March 28, 2012 Share March 28, 2012 I am surprise that a liar firm would actually help a broke with no case... why use that word "liar"? any basis? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph22 Turbocharged March 29, 2012 Share March 29, 2012 i think is law firm give poor advise knowing will loss but still get the KPKB face guy to pay the firm at the end of the day win win for firm lol i read on TNP. if the bugger cannot pay. The court order his lawyer firm to pay.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plusnplus Neutral Newbie March 29, 2012 Share March 29, 2012 I don't blame him, its his lawyers from SK Kumar Law Practice to answered.... As a lawyer, how did they not read the 'fine print' at the back of the card before advising his client whether can sue or not... in my opinion, the law firm for sure give advice/ option to the client: - go to court with big chance loose - don't go to court at all. actually i like the firm that follow what the client want. will remember SK Kumar :) but.... some law firm i know, only want client that have chance 90% win at court Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph22 Turbocharged March 29, 2012 Share March 29, 2012 You know Law firm are suppose to properly advice the client on the chances of success? if success rate is very low. they should advice the client not to take up the case as this mean they are wasting money?? Law firm who do what the client want without giving proper advice can be consider unprofessional. in my opinion, the law firm for sure give advice/ option to the client: - go to court with big chance loose - don't go to court at all. actually i like the firm that follow what the client want. will remember SK Kumar :) but.... some law firm i know, only want client that have chance 90% win at court Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maroon5 5th Gear March 29, 2012 Share March 29, 2012 i read on TNP. if the bugger cannot pay. The court order his lawyer firm to pay.. tats y i was thinking this bugger's lawyers are even stupider. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph22 Turbocharged March 29, 2012 Share March 29, 2012 tats y i was thinking this bugger's lawyers are even stupider. more like the bugger lawyer think he had something to gain. ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
Sg Election 2025!
Sg Election 2025!
The waiting time in calling in to UOB bank
The waiting time in calling in to UOB bank
ACS boy dies during high adventure course
ACS boy dies during high adventure course
Recommend lawyer to take dealer to court for mileage / odometer tampering?
Recommend lawyer to take dealer to court for mileage / odometer tampering?
China: 1st time in Shanghai
China: 1st time in Shanghai
Are You A Big Spender For A High End Bed Mattress?
Are You A Big Spender For A High End Bed Mattress?
‘What is the closest time to midnight?’ Quiz
‘What is the closest time to midnight?’ Quiz
High-rise littering
High-rise littering