Pub Quiz Windfall

May 7, 2004 1:39 PM

I played the rock-hard quiz computer at a London pub, and lost. The machine informed me that I'd won £2, so I pressed collect. £4 came out. I continued collecting, without the onscreen figure of £2 diminishing. As a penniless student, I emptied the machine and departed in a trance-like state, with £66 (US$118). The barman congratulated me, saying I was the first person he'd ever seen win anything on it. Lovely chap.

Have I committed a crime?
(US Lawyers: since I'm a foreigner, I imagine it's OK to give your opinion here. But then, IANAL.)

I know, it's morally wrong by pretty much any standards. But... I'd had a bit to drink... I'm poor... this stuff only happens in books...

posted by Pretty_Generic to work & money (29 comments total)

I think you just increased your money supply ;-)
posted by Quinbus Flestrin at 1:45 PM on May 7, 2004

Yes, but if you email me privately the address of this pub all charges will be dropped.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 1:52 PM on May 7, 2004

it's not a crime if the machine was defective---i don't think they're like ATMs. (IANAL, but i am envious) : >
posted by amberglow at 1:55 PM on May 7, 2004

Reminds me of the time the change machine in the break room at my place of employment during college mysteriously started giving nearly a dollar's worth of change for a quarter. Including another quarter. It was like an infinite loop. It was sucked dry in pretty much no time, naturally.
posted by kindall at 2:00 PM on May 7, 2004

saying I was the first person he'd ever seen win anything on it

So you ripped off a machine designed to rip you off? MORAL DILEMNA HELL!
posted by geoff. at 2:02 PM on May 7, 2004

I proscribe one Tip the Barman, two Pints for a Friends, and one Rainy Day Fund Allotment. Then shall your hoarkaries be absolved, my son.
posted by petebest at 2:06 PM on May 7, 2004

Maybe the money you won, was yours and the other winners whom were never actually paid out. Paging Dobbs.
posted by thomcatspike at 2:10 PM on May 7, 2004

I think this would make a great psychology experiment.
posted by ColdChef at 2:10 PM on May 7, 2004

Is this scenario akin to the Amazon "We have cameras" fiasco? Taking advantage of what you know to be a faulty piece of hardware or software? I don't think it's illegal, but I also hope you're not a regular at that pub because if they found out you won't be welcome back. And remember, the pub owner is the one losing that money, not just a machine. So, are you friends with the owner?
posted by vito90 at 2:23 PM on May 7, 2004

I don't see how you've broken any law. You didn't force the machine to give you money; the machine is designed to take money and at some point give winnings. Why should you be responsible for how much money it gives out? If there's a design flaw, is that your fault?

By the way... in which pub is the machine?
posted by skylar at 2:23 PM on May 7, 2004

It's at the Queen's Head, near Turnpike Lane. They charge more for a pint of Coke than a pint of bitter, that kind of place. But, it has lots of pool tables.

I should have said, it was the first time the barman had seen someone win anything serious on it. People win one or two quid all the time.

petebest is absolutely right, and drinks have been bought. But to be honest, as a computer science student I know how easy it is for a quiz machine maker to write
if (money comes out of the little hole)
then { bank--;}

...I'm more interested academically in the legal aspect than I am in absolving my very limited guilt. I doubt anyone will notice anyway, and if they do the crappy machine manufacturer should be liable.

I'm rich, rich!
posted by Pretty_Generic at 2:29 PM on May 7, 2004

I'll send you several expired bus transfers for the film rights.

You see, the machine is controlled by the London mob, and they find this posting about the machine that the Queens Head barman said a yank computer whiz scammed...

Change your domicile, quick!
posted by mwhybark at 2:56 PM on May 7, 2004

woop - we changed you to aq yak so's to appeal to the US market, plus we get the lovely 'lost bumpkin in Blimey' kinda deal.
posted by mwhybark at 2:59 PM on May 7, 2004

A YANK, argh.

sorry and shutting up now.
posted by mwhybark at 2:59 PM on May 7, 2004

I can't be a yak? I demand creative control.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 3:08 PM on May 7, 2004

Here's the question: Is the machine broken because it gave you too much money, or is it broken because it didn't correctly display the amount of your winnings, which you indeed received?
posted by monju_bosatsu at 3:19 PM on May 7, 2004

It's a London thing...when I lived in Kentish Town the phone box at the end of the street wouldn't take the last credit from a phonecard...the corner resembled the United Nations at times & I got to listen to my team's 0898 match commentary for free as opposed to the 50 quid I wouldn't have spent if I'd had to pay.

Keep the money & spend it in the pub.
posted by i_cola at 3:29 PM on May 7, 2004

monju_bosatsu: I lost. I shouldn't have got a sausage.

Maybe I am a tad guilty... :)
posted by Pretty_Generic at 3:32 PM on May 7, 2004

On a side note, in the US, if you win big where the machine displays a winning combination and the internal computer says you didn't win, you don't win (IE, say the screen says you get a Royal Flush, but the actual computer on the inside says you got a 2 pair, you don't get the winnings for a Royal Flush).
posted by jmd82 at 3:39 PM on May 7, 2004

There was an incident at Taco Bell a few years back where a drive-through customer got a bag full of the night's cash receipts instead of a bag full of food. It was fairly clear that the people who got the bag would be charged with theft if they didn't return it.

There's a concept in criminal law in the US called "willful ignorance" -- if you think you might be breaking the law and purposely try not to find out if you are, that's considered just as good as intent. We get our common law from you guys, so it might be the same.

I have no idea what this means for broken slot machines. I think a polite (anonymous) letter to the operator of the gaming machine might be the ethical solution.
posted by PrinceValium at 4:07 PM on May 7, 2004

I can't find anything that incidates liability in erroneous payout, which isn't to say that laws in the UK don't exist, but that they've not received much publicity or have yet to be tested.

General international concensus (I don't have specific links; because I spent about 40 minutes Googling this out of interest) is that most casinos and other gambling institutions post notice that all bets are void in the event of a malfunction. This is the same sort of "terms of service" clause that excuses Amazon from delivering cameras at great losses due to computer error. It does indicate that there are no fast laws protecting the casino/retailer/etc. from being forced to pay out, so they make up their own rules, to which you implicitly or explicitly agree before the financial transaction takes place.

Casinos also fight tooth and nail to declare every jackpot a malfunction, it seems, depriving even Catholic nuns from their winnings.

This brings up a more salient point: British law apparently demands that the type of "adult gaming device" you describe must pay out no more than £25.
posted by Danelope at 4:38 PM on May 7, 2004

So the machine owner actually broke the law by paying P_G more than 25 quid? [I used "quid" because I don't know how to make the spiffy L thingy. I hope I used it correctly.]

Awesome. If this was the U.S. there'd be a civil action.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:42 PM on May 7, 2004

Hey, PG, the "$14" guy might love to hook up with you!
posted by five fresh fish at 7:53 PM on May 7, 2004

Just take care of that soul, P_G. I'm watching you.
posted by anathema at 8:22 PM on May 7, 2004

you have soiled the good name of metafilter , pg .
hand in your badge.
posted by sgt.serenity at 9:21 PM on May 7, 2004

I would assume this was theft. For example, if you saw £66 quid sitting on the pavement and pocketed it instead of bringing it to a police station as lost property you'd strictly speaking be guilty of theft. Yes, it's silly for a person to leave money on the pavement and it's daft to have a machine spewing out coins left, right and centre but in either case it's money you're not entitled too.

I heard about this when speaking to a police man, which I remember because he told me something surprising. Apparently London cabbies, unlike anybody else in Britain, get paid for bringing in lost property to the tune of 10% of the items worth on the spot. Keeps them honest apparently. The copper expanded on this and so I'm led to believe that finders keepers is not enshrined in law.

Here's another thought. If you went up to a bookie who was, shall we say, a little bit confused and you got him to give you ridculous odds on a horse who's favorite. The horse wins and clean the poor old guy out. Somehow I think the law would take a dim view.

Having said that £66 isn't that much, so I doubt they'll be hunting down the Turnpike Kid!
posted by dodgygeezer at 8:26 AM on May 8, 2004

This is not legal advice and is not to be relied upon as such. No liability is accepted by the provision of this academic information.

Depends on your views about dishonesty form the two part test from the Ghosh case.

1. Was what you did dishonest according to the standards of reasonable people?
2. Did you realise that reasonable, honest people would regard what you’ve done as dishonest?

If the answer to both questions is yes, the chances are that you’ve committed an offence under s.1(1) of the Theft Act 1968.
posted by dmt at 11:58 AM on May 8, 2004

Thank you, vito, for the refernce to We have cameras. It always makes me laugh.
posted by theora55 at 3:36 PM on May 8, 2004

The only person who could reasonably expect to answer your question is a lawyer. Maybe you could pay for 15 minutes of one's time with the £66.
posted by Blue Stone at 6:21 PM on May 8, 2004