This class won't even get certified. Each class member will be claiming different amounts of damages that will have to be proved individually.

quote:

Originally posted by TO guy This class won't even get certified. Each class member will be claiming different amounts of damages that will have to be proved individually.

Possibly; however, the same was true of the Hep C class action for any claimants with pecuniary losses.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard It's also very time consuming and annoying to ensure that all the bottles of ketchup are free of glass shards or dead rodents; however, I don't think anyone is willing to let Heinz off the hook for that.

One is more reasonable to expect and carry out than the other. (But ok, i digress, they created the problem and "burden" themselves when they made the self-exclusion list, as you state below)

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard I think what a lot of you are missing here is that it was OLG that created the duty of care for itself.

Agreed. Thats what I was trying to say.

___________________
TECHNO IS THE BEST NOISE ON EARTH.
Save Techno - Stop Minimal / Tech-House

quote:

Originally posted by Jem_hadar Well, if its any kind of a long list, thats going to be a VERY time consuming, annoying task and is likely going to hurt business. Can you imagine all customers waiing in a line up to get into a casino, like as if it was a club at 1am, while the check a list of 200 names to make sure EACH individual wasnt on that list. I just dont see that being feasible and flying. HOnestly, they simply should never have agreed to support/enforce this damn self-exclusive list. Let the bloody ppl be f*cking responsible for themselves, as it should be.

If done properly it wouldn't take long at all......even if the list is thousands of people long its just a matter of looking at the last name and going to that section of the list. When I go and vote they have to find my name on the voters list and that doesn't take long at all.....besides its not like there are hundreds of people trying to get into the casino at any one time.

___________________

quote:

Scott has been introduced to the rave scene, and Ecstasy, by Craig. The two of them go out on the weekends, with some of Craigs friends, and stay up all night, dancing in a drug-fueled trance.

Last edited by Moral Hazard on Apr-26-2011 at 07:48

The province should counter sue these idiots for fraud. If you are knowingly banned from entering an establishment (self imposed or otherwise) you are comitting fraud by entering the premises. These people are openly admitting to defrauding the casinos.

I also think that underage drinkers caught in a club should be charged with fraud. The club is partially responsible but i dont think people mistakenly think they are actually 19 and accidently use someone's licence. The fraud is pre meditated and intentional.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 The province should counter sue these idiots for fraud. If you are knowingly banned from entering an establishment (self imposed or otherwise) you are comitting fraud by entering the premises. These people are openly admitting to defrauding the casinos. I also think that underage drinkers caught in a club should be charged with fraud. The club is partially responsible but i dont think people mistakenly think they are actually 19 and accidently use someone's licence. The fraud is pre meditated and intentional.

Fraud, are you fuckin' kidding? Do you know what fraud is?

Case law defines Fraud as follows "If a man by deceit or falsehood deprives another of something that is his right to have, then it is fraud." In order for either of these things to be considered fraud you would have to prove that a) these people actively deceived the casino/bar (disguised their identity, presented falsified proof of identity), and b) they deprived the bar/casino of property as a direct result of that falsehood. Certainly, there is no way that an underaged drinker in a bar is depriving anyone of property. With regard to the casinos you'd have to prove that these people won money and that they lied to get in (which doesn't seem to be the case as the allegations are that the OLG simply didn't check identities or enforce their duty of care).

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

1) when a club gets shut down because some little shit presented fake ID, the club loses money and property, the employees lose money from a lay off. Thats fraud.

2) If these people win this lawsuit, then they have caused the province to lose money due to fraudulently entering the premises and then suing them for it. They lied to get in just by being there. It is their responsibility to stay out, not the province's. They jnew full well that they weren't supposed to be there so by entering they are doing so maliciously. Furthermore, any winnings obtained while being on the property were fraudulently obtained and cost the province and casino money.

So you see, it IS indeed fraud. If certain individuals want to try and pull a scam like this lawsuit then they should have the book thrown at them. Enough is enough

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 1) when a club gets shut down because some little shit presented fake ID, the club loses money and property, the employees lose money from a lay off. Thats fraud. 2) If these people win this lawsuit, then they have caused the province to lose money due to fraudulently entering the premises. Furthermore, any winnings obtained while being on the property were fraudulently obtained and cost the province and casino money. So you see, it IS indeed fraud. If certain individuals want to try and pull a scam like this then they should have the book thrown at them. Enough is enough

The people are not fraudulently entering the casino. They are not disguising themselves in order to gain entry into the casino. The casinos are just not doing anything to prevent these people from entering the casino.

___________________

quote:

Scott has been introduced to the rave scene, and Ecstasy, by Craig. The two of them go out on the weekends, with some of Craigs friends, and stay up all night, dancing in a drug-fueled trance.

Last edited by Moral Hazard on Apr-26-2011 at 07:48

No disguise needed. They know they arent supposed to be there but maliciously enter under false pretenses. I like this logic though. Next we will let smugglers free because they happened to cross the border where there were no border inspectors. "But Judge, no one was there to stop me from bringing all that illegal booze into the country! How could i stop myself?"

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 No disguise needed. They know they arent supposed to be there but maliciously enter under false pretenses. I like this logic though. Next we will let smugglers free because they happened to cross the border where there were no border inspectors. "But Judge, no one was there to stop me from bringing all that illegal booze into the country! How could i stop myself?"

If they but themselves on the "self banning of bringing illegal booze into the country" list that was provided to people who were addicted to bringing illegal booze into the country then they may have a case.

Don't get me wrong...I think the whole lawsuit is retarded but the OLG has brought this on themselves.

___________________

quote:

Scott has been introduced to the rave scene, and Ecstasy, by Craig. The two of them go out on the weekends, with some of Craigs friends, and stay up all night, dancing in a drug-fueled trance.

Last edited by Moral Hazard on Apr-26-2011 at 07:48

quote:

Originally posted by ChemEnhanced If they but themselves on the "self banning of bringing illegal booze into the country" list that was provided to people who were addicted to bringing illegal booze into the country then they may have a case. Don't get me wrong...I think the whole lawsuit is retarded but the OLG has brought this on themselves.

So what you are saying is that the OLG should never have had the voluntary ban list in the first place? If this is the result then i agree. If i were the OLG id pull the self ban list immediately. The only obligation the OLG should have is to keep out minors. Otherwise, adults are adults and if they cant handle themselves they shouldnt go near a casino.

My personal story.... i can handle casinos fine. I go in with my set amount of money and leave when its gone. However a few years ago i got somewhat addicted to online gambling. I lost quite a bit of money and when i realized it was a problem, i banned myself from it. I dont even go to those sites anymore and automatically delete any email from them. Its called taking responsibility for you own actions. If you cant, you need treatment.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 "But Judge, no one was there to stop me from bringing all that illegal booze into the country! How could i stop myself?"

!!! LOL bahahahaha

___________________
TECHNO IS THE BEST NOISE ON EARTH.
Save Techno - Stop Minimal / Tech-House