05-12-2011, 02:52 AM
I agree with Fish4fun05. Something is really fishy. In the original email the organizer admits it was out there that the junior division was "Under age 14"
[quote duckdog1us]
If you understood that "Under Age 14" meant that a child of age 14 would be in the Jr competition, please send a response email to me with your support.
There was a typo in some information that was erroneously distributed that said under 14 instead of 14 and under.[/quote]
That clearly means 13 and under, and that a fourteen year old we be in the adult division. How else could "Under Age 14" possibly be interpreted?
The derby results, which were probably posted on the site for which you provided a link earlier in the thread, read as "14Under" With the link being broken to the rules page of his site makes it even fishier and more plausible that they know they screwed up and just don't want to pay the kid.
I also don't understand how this has the potential for the event to be "at risk to be discontinued in the future". Sounds like he's just blowing smoke trying to rally the troops to back him. He'd be better off just paying the extra $600.
I don't think it matters what the organizer's honest intentions were. It's about how they were advertising it. That kid entered the contest in good faith that he had a chance at winning $700. I'm sure it was just a simple mistake. Not that I'd try to go to court if I were the mom, but If I were that kid, I'd feel ripped off.
[signature]
[quote duckdog1us]
If you understood that "Under Age 14" meant that a child of age 14 would be in the Jr competition, please send a response email to me with your support.
There was a typo in some information that was erroneously distributed that said under 14 instead of 14 and under.[/quote]
That clearly means 13 and under, and that a fourteen year old we be in the adult division. How else could "Under Age 14" possibly be interpreted?
The derby results, which were probably posted on the site for which you provided a link earlier in the thread, read as "14Under" With the link being broken to the rules page of his site makes it even fishier and more plausible that they know they screwed up and just don't want to pay the kid.
I also don't understand how this has the potential for the event to be "at risk to be discontinued in the future". Sounds like he's just blowing smoke trying to rally the troops to back him. He'd be better off just paying the extra $600.
I don't think it matters what the organizer's honest intentions were. It's about how they were advertising it. That kid entered the contest in good faith that he had a chance at winning $700. I'm sure it was just a simple mistake. Not that I'd try to go to court if I were the mom, but If I were that kid, I'd feel ripped off.
[signature]