Woman 'lied' over disputed win

The group say they are entitled to a share

A woman being sued by a lottery syndicate over a £392,000 win has been accused of initially covering up the win, then lying about who bought the ticket.

Rosemary Sinclair, from Morecambe, is being sued at Hamilton Sheriff Court by four former colleagues from an East Kilbride betting shop.

She scooped £392,500 on the lottery on 5 May, last year, a win four members of a syndicate claim they are entitled to a share of.

Mrs Sinclair said she dissolved the syndicate the Saturday before the draw because she was fed up being owed money in unpaid stakes.

The winning ticket was for 5 May, 1999

Marie Finnie, 33, Lesley Hamilton, 25, Connie England, 32, and Lisa Dougan, 23, all from East Kilbride, say they are each owed £78,000 by Mrs Sinclair.

Their solicitor, Graham Weatherstone, put it to Mrs Sinclair that the day after the win she had lied to syndicate member Marie Finnie by claiming that the ticket had not been bought.

He said: "You lied to her face that the ticket was in the bin. The reason you lied was because you knew these women were entitled to a share.

"You tried to cover it up as you are trying to cover it up in court today."

Mrs Sinclair, who moved to Morecambe after the win, said: "I wasn't about to tell them I had won. They didn't win. The syndicate had been dissolved on the Saturday."

Mr Weatherstone said: "Their numbers were on the same ticket."

Shares calculated

She replied: "I wasn't entitled to share the £392,000. Had the numbers come up on the Saturday that would have been different."

Mr Weatherstone said: "Your first reaction when you won the lottery was to lie to the other people who had won. You lied about it then, just as you are lying to this court today."

Mr Weatherstone put it to Mrs Sinclair that she had said to the four other syndicate members that she could have done with £78,000.

He said: "That was in fact the correct calculation of the shares each of the syndicate members would have won. It made your lies more convincing."

Husband 'paid'

Mrs Sinclair said: "I didn't lie. Anyone who wins the lottery is entitled to privacy."

Later, Mr Weatherstone said that Mrs Sinclair had also initially claimed that the winning ticket had been purchased by her husband John.

Yet in evidence, Mr Weatherstone claimed, she had said she had made the purchase using money he gave her.

The civil action continues.