Raymond Brooks was as sure as one could be last Super Bowl Sunday that he would go to bed that night a millionaire.
After all, wasn’t he holding the winning sweepstakes ticket mailed to him by his friends at Publishers Clearing House?
Hadn’t the company verified his address to make sure the Prize Patrol could find the trim, ranch-style home where Brooks, 84, has lived for the last 17 years in the Kansas City area?
“I swore up and down that I’d won,” he said in October.
He deserved to win. In the past five years he’d spent more than $19,000 on magazines, dominoes, compact discs, coins and dozens of other products stuffed into more than 40 boxes in his basement and garage.
He was so confident, he invited over his brother to share the moment. So the family gathered at 9 a.m.
“They wanted us to be sure and be there,” said the former over-the-road truck driver. “They asked for directions. So we waited. They never did show up. That’s when you know you’re duped.”
Brooks is an extreme example of a very common story, said Steve Katz, a Belleville, Ill., lawyer who recently settled a class-action lawsuit against Publishers Clearing House. “His experience shows the classic deception,” Katz said. “He just spent more money than most people.”
For their part, the sweepstakes companies note that they have given out millions of dollars in prizes over the years, that their mailings fully explain everyone’s chances and that they emphasize that no one has to buy anything to enter their contests or to have a better chance of winning.
And the companies say the legal actions are hurting them. On Oct. 29, American Family Enterprises filed for bankruptcy protection to help it settle dozens of lawsuits alleging deceptive advertising in its American Family Publishing sweepstakes operations.
In addition, the sweepstakes industry faces a second assault from lawyers, lawmakers and state attorneys, who accuse the sweepstakes industry of pushing magazines, jewelry, books and other gifts with deceptive mailings promising quick riches.
The new legal challenges accuse the industry of using marketing strategies that take advantage of the elderly. Older citizens, say critics, are more apt to trust the hyperbole, such as “You are a winner,” and may be less able to read and decipher the fine print.
Industry officials complain that the new wave of court actions ignores their voluntary efforts to be more upfront with consumers in their mailings and Web sites.
But Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon, who sued Publishers Clearing House in October, said the industry wasn’t doing enough.
“This is a chance to really change an industry that preys on the elderly,” he said.
Shoe boxes full of receipts and invoices spill across Brooks’ kitchen table. Sweepstakes packets are stacked a foot high.
Brooks said at times he labored eight hours a day sticking stamps to contest forms, stuffing official-looking envelopes marked “High Priority,” and rushing them to the post office to meet 48-hour deadlines.
“It had become a job,” he said, smiling ruefully. “You wouldn’t believe my checkbook. (Nearly) every other check was Publishers Clearing House.”
Industry officials say more than 70 percent of the people who receive their offerings toss them in the trash. They say the vast majority of those who play understand they don’t have to buy anything. In fact, they say most winners had never placed an order.
“We have not told consumers we are coming to their house or that they have already won,” said Publishers Clearing House spokesman Christopher Irving. “If you read a full Clearing House mailing, you get all the information.”
But critics say that’s part of the problem: It’s difficult for anyone to wade through all the colorful materials stuffed into the artfully designed envelopes. Instead, they say consumers notice only the conspicuous statements that scream in bold type that they are a “Guaranteed Cash Winner” or are one of two people vying for a final prize. They fail to read the qualifiers on the back that say their chances of winning more than $1 are slim to none.
Even so, people do win sometimes.
Eulan Prosser of Independence, Mo., ordered a stove-top cooker through Lindenwold Fine Jewelers when his wife was in the hospital. Three weeks later, the sweepstakes sponsor called to tell him he’d won.
“I said, `You’re pulling my leg.’ A few days later, here comes a guy with a check for $15,000.”
The industry does have its staunch supporters.
“As far as I’ve seen, there is no specific targeting of the elderly in any of these sweepstakes,” said Richard Barton, senior vice president for congressional relations for the Direct Marketing Association, a national bulk mailing organization.
But William Arnold, director of the Gerontology Program at Arizona State University, said that while the marketing may not be specifically focused, the huge print, personalized messages and use of celebrities such as Ed McMahon all cater to seniors.
“There is enough in these mailings that make the elderly more vulnerable,” said Arnold, who has surveyed senior citizens about their attitudes toward the sweepstakes.
Nine states now have lawsuits pending against Publishers Clearing House, and the flurry of legal actions has created its own sweepstakes. Some consumers are confused about whether to file a claim in the Illinois settlement or seek compensation in the Missouri lawsuit. Each claims a better deal for consumers.
Nixon claims that the Missouri case will gain more for Missourians than the Illinois settlement. “We recommend that consumers don’t sign on to that deal,” he said.
Katz retorts that the Illinois settlement is the best deal. “I personally will not support a settlement that is not close to 100 percent on the dollar,” Katz said.
Brooks isn’t sure he’s buying either one. He said, “I think I just want to forget the whole thing.”
