Last updated on

Sue Me: When Lottery Wins Tear Families Apart

When Lottery Wins Tear Families Apart

You’d think that a big lottery win would perhaps bring a family together. After all, it’s a chance to share your winnings and show how much you love the people around you. Giving the people who are closest to you a slice of the money you’ve received could be the ultimate display of unity and togetherness. Helping each other out is what it’s all about, isn’t it? Not so in the following two stories, we’re about to bring you. There are tales of what happens when hitting a big jackpot doesn’t do anything to strengthen family ties. Read on here to find out about when lottery wins tear families apart.

Barbara Reddick’s Story

Barbara Reddick

The love that should exist between family members when they come into money or have good fortune seems to be in very short supply in our first story.

A bitter feud has erupted between an aunt and her nephew over who should be able to claim the entirety of a lottery prize, in Montreal, Canada.

Barbara Reddick and her nephew Tyrone MacInnis posed for press photos with the oversized check which showed their total lottery winnings. As they did so, Barbara said to Tyrone “See you in court” The total amount of their huge lottery win is Can$1.2 million.

Lottery officials have said that the names of both Tyrone and Barbara were on the winning ticket, which was bought in Margaree Forks, a tiny town in the eastern province of Nova Scotia.

Reddick said “I bought the ticket. Now he’s trying to lie and say I said ‘split’” the winnings” in an interview with a news channel. She claims that when she offered to make a share of the winnings it was only because she anticipated winning a very small amount. “I put his name on the ticket for good luck because he’s like a son to me — he was. He was lucky, but not for half a million dollars!” she added. “I’m taking him to court. I’m getting a lawyer tomorrow. Now you can print that.”

On the other side of the story, her nephew MacInnis insisted that he did have an agreement with his aunt.

Lottery officials have stated that the winnings had to be divided equally as there were two names on the ticket, so each winner would get a cheque of Can$600,000. This is an approach which has been approved by the provincial gaming commission.

In order for people to play this game, tickets were bought as if they were playing a 50-50 draw. If their ticket got drawn, they got a percentage of the sales. If they drew the lucky ace of spades, they would end up winning the jackpot, and this is what happened here.  By the time of Wednesday night’s draw, only two cards were left and even though both names were on the winning ticket, Reddick denied that the two had an agreement.

In fact, even the contact number on the ticket was for MacInnis, who lives in Glace Bay, N.S. Reddick said she had no intention of splitting the winnings with her nephew.

Speaking after the extraordinary incident, Bernice Curley, chair of the fundraiser, says she is disappointed at what happened at the presentation of the cheque. She said, as was protocol, she wrote a cheque for half of the winnings to each person after checking everything out “To make sure I was allowed to do that. They were perfectly fine with that, that it would make it easier for everyone involved. So I split the cheque evenly. I can’t really explain it. I didn’t expect anything like that to happen, I just came to deliver the cheques and present them to the winners” adding that she was extremely disappointed it had come to this.

Dave Dawe’s Story

Dave Dawe

Dave Dawes hit a huge jackpot on the Euromillions back in 2011, scooping a cool £101 million, along with his wife Angela.

However, it seems his son did not take this news well, and Michael Dawes, an Afghanistan Veteran is suing him after his father cut him out of the fortune following a drunken row at Angela’s birthday party.

Dave Dawes was accused by his son of becoming “rather grand and ungenerous in spirit” since his massive win. Michael Dawes, 32, has counter accused his father of withholding money despite promising him he would “always be looked after”.

Dave and Angela’s QC stated that the couple “did not keep their £101m prize to themselves” at Central London Court. He went on to add “One of their first actions after receiving their money was to share their good fortune with members of their family, giving away substantial amounts to family and close friends”

In total, the couple has spent £30 million on their kin and closest friends as well as setting up their own charity. Two of the main beneficiaries of the couple’s largesse were Michael and his partner, James Beedle, the court heard.

The couple has accused Michael of “burning through” much of the cash his dad gave him, which totaled £1.5 million and that he was not entitled to lifelong support. However, Michael, who was serving in Afghanistan when his dad got lucky, insisted he was given repeated assurances that he would never be short of cash again.

Michael added that when his father rang him from the UK to tell him that they’d won a huge sum on the lottery Dave had promised that “I would always be looked after”.

Michael and James had been told money would roll in for them and James had gone as far as to give up his own services career. The couple is now seeking a ruling that for as long as Dave and Angela live, they are obliged to keep financially supporting them.

Michael who was a former lecturer at Southampton University, also states that Dave is holding a £200,000 investment “on trust” for him and said the money from his father and stepmother Angela had helped him pay his mortgage and to buy a BMW as well as helping out how friends and his partner James’ family. But several times in 2011 and 2012 Michael had run out of cash, his Dad had always topped up his account. However, by March 2013 his father was getting “concerned” about Michael’s rate of spending. It was then that his parents suggested that instead of getting bulk handouts he was to get regular payments instead that would be less easy to spend.

The Dawe’s QC insisted that this was never meant to lead Michael to believe there was an endless pit from which he could have money any time he wanted. In his cross-examination of Michael, he said that Mr. Dawes senior had expressed disapproval and concern that money was being spent so fast.

In response, Michael told the court that  “My expectation was that this was an ongoing process, that there was more money coming in, and that this would be the process throughout my life”.He said that there had been ups and downs in the relationship with his father but that he hadn’t always seen eye to eye with his stepmother Angela and that they “didn’t get on well” at their first meeting in 2008. “I found her very particular about what she wanted to eat, and quite fussy,” said Michael.

In November 2013 tensions rose when Michael turned up to Angela’s birthday party without a present for her. Michael explained that he’d given her some flowers but had felt at a loss as to what else to get the woman who has everything. At the party, tempers flared and father and son rowed about money with Michael accused of telling his father that he didn’t deserve what he’d already won. Michael accepted he was worse the wear for a drink but argues his father had tried to assault him and had to be held back.

Since then a rift has been established between the two. “They have not spoken since and Dave and Angela’s financial support has ceased,” added Mr. Wilson, QC.

Michael said the row had been a tragedy over something trivial and accused Dave and Angela of showing “arrogance and ungenerosity of spirit, I saw how over time their attitude changed from being relatively humble to being rather grand. They expected the people around them to treat them differently because of their money,” claimed Michael.

Judge Nigel Gerald has now reserved his judgment on the case and will give his ruling at a later date

It seems that when it comes to money blood is no thicker than water and whatever the family tie or relationship lottery wins like this have the power to make or break the closeness of family ties. It will be interesting to see how both cases play out in the courts, but the stories show just what money and greed can do to people for many people money is a good thing, for some, it proves otherwise.