Representative: You have a commitment to a minimum of 2 winnings a month because of the amount of lotteries, [...] but it can be from millions to pennies, everything can be,
Aner: No, not in percentages, really, what are the chances in percentages?
Representative: I don't have any, I don't know what to tell you, each one is something else,
And later in the conversation:
Aner: [...] I understood as if you might have a statistic like this that you say,
Representative: Listen, you have a serious mass of lotteries, which means that your chances are much higher, it improves your chances in a very high ratio
And later on:
Aner: How do they give you the cheapest option?
Representative: Because you're here in groups, the prize is also shared, you don't participate alone, you participate with other people, it means that if through 4 columns you won millions, then it will be divided and then the most you will earn, is hundreds of thousands, but if that happens you'll send a chocolate lion won't you?
Aner: If I make hundreds of thousands, surely.
Representative: Well, that's it, you see, your chances are much higher, but the prizes will always be divided, these [sic] if you won through the regular lottery and then you take it on your own."
In this context, the Respondent notes that the Applicant did not attach transcripts from conversations that took place with her sales representatives. When the investigative researchers on behalf of the Applicant were questioned in the proceeding, they testified that there may have been additional conversations that took place but were not attached to the file. From this, the Respondent concludes that the conversations that took place between the investigators and the Respondent's representatives support the claim that the Respondent's representatives do not mislead the clients regarding the probability of winning.
- However, even if the telephone representatives are not misleading, the representations on the website are allegedly misleading. These representations are consistent with the experts' statements about the lack of "statistical methods" to increase the chances of winning (as opposed to the purchase of many tickets, which does not amount to a "statistical method"). Moreover, the profit expectancy is small.
- My conclusion is that with regard to the representations regarding the advantages of engaging with this Respondent are presented as being related to the "team of experts" and the statistical methods allegedly used by the Respondent, there is a reasonable basis to assume that these are representations that have nothing behind them, and that they are liable to mislead the customers with respect to a material interest in the transaction. As noted above in relation to Respondent 1, increasing the chances of winning by means of a large number of participants is not a special "statistical method".
- Respondent 3 argues that even if the claim that there is deception in relation to some of the representations is accepted, it is still necessary to prove a factual causal connection whereby if the class members had been aware of the misleading representation, they would not have purchased the Respondent's appointment, and the Council did not present even a single slight evidence of the causal connection between the deception and the damage.
- I do not believe that at the stage of the application for certification, the Applicant must present evidence of the manner in which the class members would have acted if the misleading representation had not been presented to them. When it is prima facie proven that a representation of an act or omission that is liable to be misleading in a material matter, the prima facie conclusion that there is someone who would have changed his behavior as a result is required from the finding itself. Moreover, if Respondent 3 had not believed that data about a team of experts and statisticians contributing to the matter changed the conduct of consumers, it would not have included them in its publications. This is sufficient to establish a finding about a reasonable chance of a decision on this matter in favor of the group in the main proceeding. Detailed data regarding the manner in which the alleged deception affected the conduct of the class members and the scope in question relating to the scope of the damage, are not required at the preliminary stage in which the proceeding is located, and even later on, it is necessary to examine which of the parties is burdened in this context. Moreover, the requested remedies are not limited to monetary relief, and even in this aspect the justification for approving the conduct of the proceeding is evident.
Respondent 5 - Club 4 yo
- The Club4U website also states that " the CLUB4U club is based on experts and statisticians who increase your chances of winning the lottery for you." It is also stated that "the Members' Club has thousands of customers and brings together a team of experts, statisticians, mathematicians and managers with extensive experience in the field of lottery. The experts use methods and reductions to significantly increase and increase the chances of winning for all of the company's customers [...] Club 4U's special software allows the company's customers to change the lottery numbers of their choice in their personal columns at any given time, and even to choose a strong combination from the pool of experts that increases the chances of"
- Similar messages were presented in the terms of engagement with the Respondent: " Whereas: "Club 4 U" has a mathematical statistical method by which it is possible to significantly reduce the number of numbers participating in the regular lottery lottery, which is held according to the plan and in accordance with the bylaws of the National Lottery, and to forgo the participation of many combinations of numbers whose chances of winning are low from the outset (hereinafter: the "Method"), with the intention of increasing the chances of winning. "; " We use a computerized statistical mathematical method in order to significantly reduce the number of numbers participating in the regular lotteries, while at the same time forgoing the participation of many combinations of numbers, whose chances of winning (in our opinion) are low in the first place. [...] We are trying to increase the chances of winning for the benefit of all the members of the club, but naturally we cannot guarantee a win. In any case, the win depends on luck." [Emphasis added – the undersigned].
- The respondent's presentations show that, according to the respondent, it is assisted by experts and statisticians, and uses a mathematical and statistical method of reducing and omitting number combinations that have a low chance of winning, and thus offers a higher quality product to customers.
- Snir Chen, the witness on behalf of the Respondent, was asked who those experts and statisticians were that the Respondent was assisted by, and replied that the Respondent was assisted by the services of Gabi Schlesinger, a statistician, who has been accompanying the Respondent since the beginning of the activity in 2009. When asked who was a member of the team of mathematicians and statisticians, he replied (p. 107 of the transcript):
- "It is written in the middle of the first page that Club for You employs mathematicians and statisticians who have extensive and rich experience in composing strong combinations with high chances of winning the lottery. I tell you that there are such publications on your website today. [...] Who is a member of this team
- You can ask Gabi who he is helping. Gabi is our expert.
S.K.H. What can you say about this question?
- There's another assistant named Nico who helps him, I don't know what his education is, but I know that Gabi is helped by Nico and it could be that he is still alive. I never asked him who all the people he uses are, but you can call it the plural. I don't know if they are statisticians or mathematicians, but it is possible.
S.T. Gabi Schlesinger is the only mathematician we pay for. He's an outside company. He doesn't work for Club 4U. He only provides the service and with whom and with what and how much, I don't know."
- It appears from this that already in the basic aspect of the existence of "a team of experts, statisticians, mathematicians and managers with rich seniority and experience", a gap is revealed between the representation published by this respondent and the facts on the ground.
- As to the method itself, Mr. Chen was also asked about the statistical mathematical method that the Respondent allegedly uses, and replied that it is a method of reductions (pp. 106-107 of the transcript):
- "[...] The reduction method referred to by Gabi Schlesinger, the statistician, who by the way has been accompanying us since the beginning of the activity, in 2009, that in fact all the columns given to our clients are limited columns.
- If you have touched on the reductions, do the reductions increase the chances of winning?
- I'm not the person to answer whether it increases or not. We have our expert and you can invite him, Gabi Schlesinger, and he'll be happy to testify about the method."
Respondent 5 did not invite Mr. Gabi Schlesinger to testify, so it was not possible to understand whether the reduction method increases the chances of winning, and what this method actually is. As I noted above, the term "reduction method" can be used to describe various conducts, only one of which was recognized in Dr. Regev's opinion as relevant. It is concerned with reducing the double submissions of combinations with group participation, a process that has limited benefit in winning the eighth prize in the sum of NIS 10. It was not presented to me that respondent 5 was using this method, which Dr. Regev believed was extremely limited. All Mr. Chen knew how to say was that the company selects the combinations from a limited pool of combinations built by Mr. Schlesinger (p. 107 of the transcript):