Encore Boston Harbor Defends Voucher Policy in Court: No Penny Pinching Intended
Encore Boston Harbor legal representatives are requesting the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to endorse a previous ruling that favored the casino.
In August 2019, a resident of Massachusetts named Richard Schuster filed a class-action lawsuit against Encore Boston Harbor and its parent business, Wynn Resorts. Schuster asserts he was one of the first guests at the $2.6 billion integrated resort when it debuted a couple of months earlier in June.
According to Schuster's lawsuit, Encore Boston Harbor was afflicted with technical issues in its voucher redemption terminals, often called "TRUs" in the gaming industry. The unattended cashier kiosks wouldn't produce coins for change because of coin blockages and "coin-mechanism malfunctions."
Wynn officials disclosed that the TRU devices were transformed into coinless versions a few days after the casino's opening. Since then, the kiosks provide cash equal to the nearest whole dollar worth of the vouchers inserted. The remaining change below a dollar is printed on a new TRU ticket that could be exchanged at a staffed cashier window.
Schuster asserts he was shortchanged on the 12 times he visited Encore.
Casino goers have brought up short-changing lawsuits in recent years. MGM Resorts, Hard Rock International, and Caesars Entertainment have also faced similar issues, but none of the casino operators have been convicted.
District Court Ruling in Favor of Wynn
In February, US District Judge Allison Burroughs rejected Schuster's claims against Encore Boston Harbor for "breach of contract, promissory estoppel, conversion," and violating Massachusetts' consumer protection regulations.
Burroughs decided that Wynn's usage of coinless TRUs was not in violation of state law or gaming directives enforced by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. She further dismissed Schuster's allegations that coinless cashier kiosks were "immoral, unethical, and underhanded" because a minimal percentage of tickets are exchanged, which allows Encore to keep the change, which amounts to millions of dollars yearly.
The brief states, "Plaintiff admits that even after he learned he could redeem the tickets at the cashier window, he still either threw the tickets in the trash or used them to continue playing the slot machines and he never once attempted to redeem them at a cashier window."
"In other words, even at the moment when Plaintiff admits he had the information he now argues should have been included on the tickets, the allegedly omitted information did not alter his conduct, and therefore, his argument that had the omission not occurred, he would have behaved differently is invalid," the brief concluded.
Request for Dismissal by Wynn
Schuster appealed Burroughs' ruling to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, where the federal appellate court is anticipated to shortly decide whether it will hear the case. In its 84-page brief submitted last week, Wynn attorneys asked that the case be dismissed.
Schuster was not a victim of unfair or deceiving conduct during any of his twelve trips to Encore. Instead, he elected to play slot machines, received clear and precise directions on how to redeem his TRU Tickets, did not receive any deceiving details, and continually made the decision, over and over again, to do something other than what was instructed.
"Encore's decision to institute the contested TRU practice was an allowable one, in accordance with the legal standard. Encore's conduct was, as a matter of fact, not unfair, deceptive, or actionable," the Wynn brief stated.
"Accordingly, for the reasons discussed above, the entry of summary judgment in Encore's favor on all of Schuster's claims should be upheld," the brief concluded.
Read also:
- The 15-year-old murderer admits to fatally shooting Francesco, who was 14.
- Schalke's pressure has affected Terodde.
- Columbia University Faces Possible Expulsion Following Demonstrations
- Football turmoil in Munich: Last-minute penalty stuns Bayern
Source: www.casino.org
