Win a £3m house in Hampshire

[201p]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/16204519.VIDEO___PHOTOS__This___3million_mansion_could_be_yours_for_just___25/#comments-anchor

Another raffle, £25 to enter.

.

There could be a business venture here. Instead of trying to compete with Rightmore or Purple Bricks. One could start a raffle website for £1m+ homes that owners want to get rid of.

You skim a fee for each raffle, and the owner that signs up. Maybe £5000 to set up a raffle. The owners set a time scale, the level of media coverage/advertising (bolt on extra fees), and the minimum price they get back for the home. It could be called Ringmybell dot com (so far no one is using that address). You could sign up punters with a direct debit, for £50 a month to buy a random raffle tickets each month - you never know you could win a house anywhere! Barring legal issues, it could go global, and this site would be worth $10bn on the NASDAQ at some point. Lol.

[Gloommonger]

Too late.

Rafflemyhouse.com

Raffle-house.com

Winabode.com

Londonhouseraffle.co.uk

 

[sarahbell]

shitforbrainsgivemeyourmoneythankyou.com

 

[UmBongo]

Ohhhh...a Huf Haus! 

[201p]

Update on this

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

Here's what you could have won! Fury as winner of raffle for couple's £3m home are told they WON'T get the house because not enough tickets were sold (but they will get £110,000 cash instead)

They still sold 30,000 tickets raising £750,000 but the value of the prize was revealed to be just £110,000

---

[Harley]

On 04/05/2018 at 14:34, UmBongo said:

Ohhhh...a Huf Haus! 

So I can unscrew it and move it somewhere nicer?

[dgul]

I think it's a good lesson that 'all the money net of costs' for something like this is likely to be equal to 'hardly any of the money'.

[Ash4781b]

I would expect expenses like that to be foreseen tbh. Seems kinda sneaky. 

Edit: should add I would expect the likelihood of selling all tickets in a raffle like this is 0. Or as they suggest to get it closer to 1 have to spend big.

[dgul]

2 hours ago, Ash4781b said:

I would expect expenses like that to be foreseen tbh. Seems kinda sneaky. 

I think it might be illegal.  Difficult to see how a few £25 buyers of tickets could bring a court case, though.  The whole system (this sort of lottery) needs some heavy consumer protection, IMO.

[spunko]

What kind of an idiot spends £25 on a ticket but doesn't read the terms? I remember checking their website and it clearly said this would happen if nobody wins the house, it wasn't even hidden away.

[Green Devil]

Judging by the other thread indicating only 1.7% of 1 mill houses selling, this is probably the only way to shift your 1 million pad.

[spygirl]

On 11/01/2019 at 20:27, spunko said:

What kind of an idiot spends £25 on a ticket but doesn't read the terms? I remember checking their website and it clearly said this would happen if nobody wins the house, it wasn't even hidden away.

Probbaly some how sees 'Win a house in a raffle' and does not get the TsnCs until they buy a ticket.

 

[goldbug9999]

On 11/01/2019 at 19:05, dgul said:

I think it might be illegal.  Difficult to see how a few £25 buyers of tickets could bring a court case, though.  The whole system (this sort of lottery) needs some heavy consumer protection, IMO.

Contract law merely require "consideration" i.e. a non zero value on both sides, it does not require parity of value. If i agree to give you my car that is unenforceable , if however I agree to sell it to you for 1p then that is enforceable. I'm not sure of the mechanics of raffles and whether they are legally seen as contract but if they are then the relative amount of the ticket vs the prize is immaterial.

[dgul]

14 minutes ago, goldbug9999 said:

Contract law merely require "consideration" i.e. a non zero value on both sides, it does not require parity of value. If i agree to give you my car that is unenforceable , if however I agree to sell it to you for 1p then that is enforceable. I'm not sure of the mechanics of raffles and whether they are legally seen as contract but if they are then the relative amount of the ticket vs the prize is immaterial.

The legal side was set out in the T&Cs -- if they have inflated costs significantly beyond those actually incurred then they'd be in trouble.  The numbers indicate that their costs for running the competition were around £500k, which seems vast, frankly, and I'd suggest that it is likely that they've been siphoning money out of the competition account.  But, it would have to be a strange court case as few people are out of pocket by more than £250, say (10 tickets) -- so they'll probably get away with it.

I just find it odd that the law regarding lotteries/raffles is fairly well set out so that it becomes difficult to create this sort of thing (without having strange 'free entry' options, etc), but there is no cover for this sort of scam -- that is, where the prize is a %age of net income, but where costs are incurred far beyond what is reasonable in order to reduce the payout.