A cycle shop in Mississippi accidentally gave away an ATV ten times in a row during a promotional contest, when all ten of the people who were randomly selected from over a thousand turned out to have working copies of the same key. The store’s owner still doesn’t know how it happened, but he held firm to the intent of the original promotion and gave away only one ATV, which has angered at least one non-winning winner.
“It’s just a big disappointment because my key worked, and that’s what we were promised – if your key works, you get the ATV,” said Cheri Reus, who was second in line and whose key worked just fine. She’s since complained to the attorney general, and a spokesperson for the office said they were investigating the issue.
The other nine contestants apparently agreed to let the cycle shop owner draw the winner’s name from a hat, which we think shows a remarkable level of customer compassion for the store owner.
“Hattiesburg business accidentally promises 10 free ATVs” [The Clarion-Ledger via Metafilter]
More From Consumerist
-
Sign At Denny’s Says It Won’t Honor Veterans Day Giveaway. Restaurant Says It Has No Idea How Sign Got There
-
Starbucks Testing Out Powermats So You Can Wirelessly Charge Your Phone While Camped Out There
-
The World Needs More People Like This Walmart Candy Sorter
-
Detroit Sneaker Store Offers Free Nikes To Kids Who Show Up For School
-
Sprint Won’t Grant Employee Discount, New Customer Threatens Unholy Twitter War
Man, whoever ends up winning this thing better never park it anywhere.
It’s actually pretty nice to see these customers *not* get pissed off at the store owner due to what looks like an honest mistake.
I think the fair solution to all is to divide the cash value of the ATV among the 10 winners – and then auction the ATV off for charity or something nice – winners all around!
PS-after the original winner, how did other people even get to try their keys?
Typical CL melodramatic headline. The store never promised 10 free ATVs, the store promised 1 and delivered 1.
The key drawing was to eliminate the 1000 (or potentially more) people in attendance down to 10 and thus bring a level of suspense and excitement to an event. The single working key was supposed to reduce the 10 down to one. When the key selection method failed, the store resorted to another means of selection.
All in all it seems quite fair and appropriate.
What was not mentioned, and most likely happened as it is the norm in these types of drawings, is that the 9 losing keys were to have received consolidation prizes such as t-shirts and helmets. Big difference between a t-shirt and an ATV, but a t-shirt is better than what the other 990 attendees received.
Working in a hospital, I got to see the unfortunate victim of an ATV accident today. NOT a pretty sight.
@hillsrovey:
Having been to enough of these events, and planned a few of them myself to support the local Little League or Scouting groups, most likely the special key was suppose to be Gold, while the losing keys were to be silver or other colors. The store owner then gets to play a game of Mary tries first (knowing Mary’s key is blue and no good) to build up the excitement and suspense of the drawing and award special door prizes as consolidation to the unlucky key holders. But when everybody’s key was gold (or whatever color) the game plan was ruined and obviously vocalized to the crowd.
I’m not entirely certain that the other 9 winners would not have a possible cause of action for a lawsuit. A think one could argue breach of contract on the part of the shop owner. His unilateral offer was that they perform the action of putting the key in, and if it works, they get the ATV. Just because he screwed up doesn’t necessarily absolve him of his responsibility to fulfill his obligations. If I recall, there is a case regarding a car dealer that put up a sign on a golf course saying “Hole in 1 gets a free car”. It was setup for an event, and the day after the event, they had not taken it down. A golfer saw the sign, hit a hole in one, and demanded his car. The Car Dealer lost. I think you could argue that this is a similar case.
I’m only saying this because 2 people have Effed it up.
It’s C o n s o l a t i o n Prizes. not C o n s o l i d a t i o n prizes. Consolation as in, Here’s something to console you since you didn’t win the grand prize. Not, Here’s a prize to consolidate you. That would be like a giant tuna press.
/ grammar nazi
@Teqonix: Word. The customers are content, so why is everyone else bitching?
I want a giant tuna press that can consolidate people. I think it would console me to have such a device.
Speaking of planning etc.
Years ago my dad planned an event to raise money for a school function. I think it was a PTA event. Any way the function was a Bingo with a grand prize of a portable 17″ Color TV and door prizes for everybody in attendance.
Well a 17″ Color TV was a big thing back then and EVERBODY in the community came to play Bingo.
Three problems:
First of all there were not enough Bingo cards. Somebody ran down to the VFW and stole their cards to solve that problem.
Second problem was that Dad planned on maybe 100 people coming and was going to have the bingo held in the school cafateria. There might have been 500 in attendance. Moved the bingo to the school gym. 2nd problem solved.
Oh, and problem 3 was the door prizes for everybody. Dad had his 100 prizes for the anticipated 100 attendees. Little travel chess sets and cheap board games, big bags of candy. A pass to dinner for two. Stuff like that. Lots of donations from local businesses. Dad had not planned on 500 in attendance. I was 16 and had a learners permit. I was given dad’s wallet and told to drive to town and go to the TG&Y and start buying stuff. The principle from the school showed up behind me with a couple of parents from the school and paid for everything out of his pocket. We bought a lot of stuff. Didn’t want to disappoint the crowd.
People screw up. Dad was never invited to do a fun raiser for the school again.
@deejayqueue:
You are right. I type faster than I can spell.
Everyone screws up once in a while – the business should be held to some extraordinary level due to an understandable error. If the customers agreed to this solution, why is there a massive blog of criticism?
@Teqonix: Ditto.
It’s not as if any of them were honestly expecting there to be multiple winners for this and they aren’t out anything by not getting the ATV. They left the same way they came just like the other 990 people.
I don’t know if Cheri is owed anything legally but it seems wrong that a goof in a contest should cost the owner another ATV.
@nglatt: There isn’t. Not even the article itself sounds critical of the owner.
One customer is upset: she complained to the Attorney General.
My crackpot wife and her friend once wanted to go to Europe with me while I went to conduct business. We couldn’t really afford to pay the price for four boat tickets to Europe so her and her friend set up a raffle.
They called the local TV repair shop and got the owner to donate a TV and pay for the cost of tickets for their charity, the “Ladies Overseas Aid.”
They didn’t know that it was illegal until a local detective stopped by. My crackpot wife thought he wanted to buy a ticket! He informed her that it was illegal as they were selling tickets under a false pretense…
Lucky for the two, there turned out to be a “Ladies Overseas Aid” charity because my wife’s friend held the auction and awarded the TV to someone. That nice TV shop owner actually flew the president of that charity in and my wife’s friend was forced to turn over the money!
What an adventure!
I ended up finding a way to get them to travel to Europe. It was good that I did. If I hadn’t, my wife’s friend borrowed against her apartment building!!! I found that if I did some work on the boat I traveled on I could get my tickets for free! Worked out pretty well and we were all pretty happy.
That was until my crackpot wife got her body stuck in ships cabin porthole!
@Trick: Are you under the influence of something? That post made exactly zero sense.
Trick, I seen that episode of I love Lucy.
More importantly, Everyone was happy exept for ONE miserable bat.. err .. woman.
I assume this was a local shop and the owner could probably not affort to give out 10 ATV’s. I love the fact that the other eight people were happy to be part of the event. In all probability they were given consolation prizes or what not.
There is always one in the crowd that has to ruin everything and call a lawyer for everything.
RG
I suspect that the lady who is complaining is doing so because there is no reason to assume that the first person who used the key was the person who had the actual winning key. All ten of them were equally likely to have the winning key. The owner could also have resolved the issue be replacing 9 of the keys and redrawing. Those 8 who were willing to walk away may not have understood that they just walked away from their 10% chance of winning an ATV.
@rockergal: Shit, all this time, I thought that was a Saved By The Bell episode. You know, the one where Mr. Belding knows exactly what Zach’s up to when he hears about a raffle? Oh, that Zach Morris!
@rockergal: If you want to stay in business, don’t make promises you can’t keep. I have every right to call a lawyer if you agree to give me X if I do Y, and I do Y and don’t get X, you are in breach of contract. End of story.
The guy should have tested the keys first. He didn’t. It should cost him. An honest business would keep its promises.
@Trick? You got some ‘splainin to do!
It’s people like this that make us have to listen to and read all the fine print for every promotion, coupon, or special offer. This then allows business to hide things in this fine print, like the million dollars being paid out in 30 annual payments, or that you have to opt in for offers from the company to participate.
@Buran: Ummmm, but he didn’t promise “everyone with a working key gets an ATV!” Everyone who came was told there was only one ATV to give away, and of the ten people who got keys, they all knew that only one key was supposed to work. This is why it’s called an accident. It’s a lot easier to stay in business if your customers aren’t overlitigious jerks.
And Consumerist/Chris Walters, did you actually read the article? “After apologizing to the 10 contestants and gathering them into a separate room, Myatt said he placed each of their names into a hat and drew one name, announcing the winner.” Your last paragraph of factual reporting, well, it’s not very factual. Completely wrong, actually.
It would really depend on the exact wording, but if the contestants were told a working key meant a new ATV, legally they are obligated to give it.
In most of these contests (here’s a key, see if it starts a car), the dealer is betting on no one winning because they make the chances so small (one working key in thousands of mailings). They buy insurance against that happening, actually, so that they aren’t out the entire cost of the car. This contest sounds somewhat different, but I still think the losers may have a case.
@stevied
You know, I’m a hobbyist promoter so I do fundraisers and public events all the time, and I would definitely have asked your dad do another one for sure. Here’s why:
1) He planned an event that clearly had wide appeal
2) He promoted it well enough to get a good turnout
3) He thinks on his feet to solve the inevitable problems that came up, and even recruited you to help
4) He had team members willing to help instead of turning on him
5) It’s likely he learned a thing or two (like *never* promise door-prizes to everyone) and would have done an even better job the next time around.
@Beerad: I haven’t seen the actual flyer, but I’ve gotten similar contest ads before: “If your key works, you win!”
Sounds pretty straightforward to me. It’s false advertising if the key works and you don’t get the prize.
@Beerad: No, I did not read the article. I didn’t even read all of the headline. My rule for posting is, I read the first 3-5 words of the headline, then make up a post based on what I think the story might be about. Looking back now at the original article, I’m actually surprised I guessed so accurately.
There! Now that I’ve finally got that off my chest, to the rest of the readers: I did indeed screw up the last part of the story and said that the ATV was awarded to the first person who tried the key. I’ve since corrected the post so that it’s accurate. My apologies.
@Chris Walters: Wow, that’s a lot of snark. Sorry I pointed out a factual inaccuracy that significantly impacted the resolution of the story and generated several of comments. Apologies if my comment was sarcastic, but really you were way off base in the post.
@Buran: Sadly, like everything else in the law, it’s not that straightforward. If there’s been a mistake, or some sort of error in the contest, often the company is off the hook. Admittedly, we don’t know in this case, but even if the advertising said “If your key works you win” it might not be enough – clearly it’s an advertisement to show up and have a chance to win, which was accurate. Everyone who showed up seems to have understood that there was 1 ATV to give away and there would only be 1 winner, so it’s hard to say that their expectations would be otherwise. And everyone who got a key thought their chance of winning was 1 in 10. Which ultimately it was, given the hat-draw resolution.
@Beerad: No, because its no different then having a lotto for 200 dollars, announcing anyone who has the number 42 is the winner, having 10 people have 42, and only give the money to one of them.
That’s completely different then having the same thing, but have 99% of the contestants have the same number (Like something that happened before, on here).
But on RTFA, I realize, its the same thing. They should have gone out and bought 9 tiny plush atvs and given them out to the other contestants instead, cause technically, they fulfilled their part of the contract like that
@cde: But what if when everyone comes in, you tell them “Now remember folks, there’s only one grand prize, and only one person has the number 42!” When multiple people claim the prize, the conclusion isn’t “Sweet, we all won!” but “Hmmmm, something clearly isn’t right.”
When the rules of the contest have been explained to all participants, and an accident happens that contradicts those rules, the rules don’t go out the window, the accident does.