Customers strolling into a South San Jose Wells Fargo this morning had no idea that millionaires would be cashing their checks.
The branch, near Snell Avenue and Branham Lane, was all smiles as clients expressed surprise and joy for the tight-lipped winners of the $543 Mega Millions jackpot working inside.
The Wells Fargo workers are the 11 winners of a half-billion-dollar Mega Millions jackpot won in July. The California Lottery did not publish their identities, but the press quickly figured out who they were. It is common for the press to do extra digging for information when lottery winners refuse to give a brief press conference.
"They were all happy-happy-happy!" said Darlene Medina who stepped in to the lucky bank Monday morning. "They were very enthused!"
The extra enthusiasm, however, was the only giveaway that something out of the ordinary had happened at the bank as employees remained silent about their branch's lotto-luck. They decided to receive a one-time payout of $29 million each, according to lottery officials.
"I tried asking who won, but they told me they couldn't say," said Cornelius Lopez, a retired San Jose resident who has been a long-time customer of the branch.
After unexpectedly closing its doors on Saturday, the day after the winners were announced, the bank re-opened on Monday, braced for the attention and speculation that would come its way. Lowered blinds, a conspicuous lack of name plates and a communications consultant stationed at the bank were just some of the branch's attempts to tame the swelling anticipation.
"They remain quiet, very quiet," said Ash Madraswala, a San Jose realtor, who heard a rumor that one of the winners has temporarily left town to escape the extra attention.
To the questions of whether the winners were at the branch that day — how they celebrated — what they would do with their money — Wells Fargo representatives offered no official comment.
And in the face of the branch's reticence, customers turned to speculating over whether the winners would continue work at the Wells Fargo location given their newfound riches.
"I guess they're going to need new employees," said Ricardo Alvarez, a student at San Jose State.
In addition to expressing curiosity, clients pleasantly surprised by their financiers' success were thrilled for the familiar faces they've been doing business with for years. "This is the best bank," said Jamshed Khan, "They deserve it."
Ahmed Abdo learned of the office's lottery win as he was entering the bank. "I had no idea!" he said. Abdo had heard that the winners worked at a Wells Fargo, but never considered that his local branch would be the lucky one. "I'm surprised, I'm shocked," he said as he rushed in to congratulate the employees.
Amid the fanfare, Wells Fargo representatives seemed eager to get back to business as usual.
As Jose Tamayo, an Uber driver and photographer coming in to cash a check said today, "This doesn't make them any different. They just got more money than me right now."
l find it fascinating that the California lottery would withhold the names of these winners. The lottery out here is pretty adamant that winners have to be identified.." transparency" they say.l fear it is because of the upheaval created by that winner from the north East, who went to court to shield her identity. California better come around to the idea, that there are winners out there who do not want the exposure.This balls to the walls attitude better stop, hopefully this starts a trend moving forward.
*Perhaps this means l can ditch the Gorilla suit after all.
Keep the gorilla suit. Transparency with gaming is key in being above board. Once secrecy happens more fraud blossoms. True fact.
It was eluded that the winners worked in finance. Wells Fargo has years to go to clean up its act. I can see why these winners didn't want to name the financial entity. I'd be embarrassed if I worked for them . Hope they enjoy the fruits of this win.
For some reason you and others believe because a group of people agreed to share any prize winnings, there was more than ONE jackpot winning ticket. You're basically suggesting the California lottery should publish a list all the people that might share the jackpot. And it appears you missed the August 4 news article on LP identifying Roland Reyes as the person purchasing the ticket.
If there were 11 signatures on the back of the ticket, you have a point, but I believe Reyes signed for the group. Full disclosure means publishing the names of all prize winners including "winning" a free scratch-off ticket and that will never happen.
My post has nothing to do with how many people won or not. My post is about the CA hanging back from publishing their names, not that l want that, but that for ONCE they backing off.l love privacy & think everyone is entitled to it, whether they win a jackpot or not. There is not a single post out there from me ASKING to know who won, ever since l joined LP. I find CA lottery commission exhibiting strange behavior,considering that their own handbook stresses in strong terms “ even if you form a trust.. we will expose you.” I like seeing multiple winners for large jackpots. I think you confusing my posts with some other character, but that’s alright Stack, l can flow with it.
One person claimed the money. Knowing who received a cut after the initial claim is not the role of the lottery office. I am sure there were separate private agreements between the sole claimant and the other winners.
These winners seem to be the most level headed winners I have seen to date.
Nope. In addition to Reyes, the winners were identified as Marigold Villaruz, Rita Sinha, Murad Kureshi, Nga Lam, My Nguyen, Solonachchige Dissanayake, Isabel Dominguez, Alejandra Villanueva, Alice Socorro and Joji Ziegele. They all work for a Wells Fargo branch in San Jose.
.
Boy, I sure hope if I ever win anything, that I can remain anonymous in my state.
I'm afraid I'm in the hot seat as far as being sued goes. Not for anything serious, I guess
but the n/hood has gotten filled with jealous people, like "me only" people. I may have to come up with some kind of plan, but thanks to some of the comments here, if the unthinkable happens, I may have a bit of clue as to what to do.
But please folks, continue on providing clues if you could.
I never hurt anyone. I never damaged anyone's property. Neither do I intend doing either.
Mr. Groppo
You said: "l find it fascinating that the California lottery would withhold the names of these winners." so it certainly looks like (to me any ways) you're wondering why the California Lottery didn't publish the names of anyone that might share the winnings.
From what I've read so far, 11 people have equal shares in the jackpot, apparently Reyes bought the ticket and was the spokesman for the group. Regardless of how many people may eventually share in the jackpot, there was only ONE winning ticket and the California Lottery probably thought publishing ONE name was sufficient.
I'm not so sure if that's a good move. Bank full of millionaires sound good to a bank robber.
Good point, Artist77.
According the lottery winner's handbook that I printed some 15 years ago, so may have changed, California will cut up to 100 separate checks for lottery pools. States like Massachusetts only cut one which I find unacceptable as it places all the tax burden on the purchaser rather than that of the individuals. My bottom line is this is the 21st Century, take care of the consumer.
Stack, would it have made a difference if l used the word " interesting" instead of fascinating, given that the words are interchangeable? Perhaps you should look up the CA lottery handbook on rules & regs to see how l came to my statement of ...
It says : Even if you form a trust, we will publish your name, where the ticket was purchased & the amount. I cannot recall them ever not following through on their word. That sir, is the Sole reason for my post. Are we on the same page now sir, or are you going to " beat a dead horse" so to speak?
Good day.
Thanks Bleuchien. Glad someone got what I meant.
I got the following from the latest CA Lottery regulations:
“Designated Group Representative” means a group Winner who shares ownership of a winning Ticket with other Winners and who has been identified on a Multiple Ownership Claim Form as the authorized representative of an entire group of Winners.
5.6 MULTIPLE-WINNER CLAIMS
5.6.1. More than 100 Winners
If there is a group of more than 100 Winners of any one Prize, regardless of the value of the Prize, the Lottery will require the group to select a Designated Group Representative to receive and distribute the Prize. Payment of the Prize to the Designated Group Representative discharges the Lottery from all liability for payment of the Prize to individual members of the group.
5.6.2. Prizes of $1 Million or More
Prizes of $1 million or more, whether payable as annuity payments or lump sum cash payments, may be divided among and paid to up to 100 individual Winners provided the Lottery receives a valid Multiple Ownership Claim Form directing such payment. Payment will be made to each Winner as provided on the Multiple Ownership Claim Form.
5.6.3. Prizes of Less than $1 Million
All cash or merchandise Prizes valued at less than $1 million, Claimed by a group of Winners, will be paid to a Designated Group Representative pursuant to these regulations and Lottery rules. Such payment will discharge the Lottery from all liability for payment of the Prize to individual Winners.
It sounds like Reyes might be the "designated group representative" for the office pool (even though Section 5.6.2 doesn't explicitly mention a designated group representative), so only his info was released by the CA Lottery. The other ten members of the pool are winners too, so their info is public record and somebody requested that info from the CA Lottery and released that info to the public.
Or maybe there just wasn't enough room on the back of the winning ticket for all eleven pool members to sign...
Section 5.6.1-States that the designated group rep is the one who gets the entire check, then it is up to that individual to cut checks for the other winner’s in the group. That’s a little risky wouldn’t you say? What if this person skips town? I guess you better know your group rep really really well, or you could be searching huts in Tibet or Africa for this person who left the group high & dry. I love the section where the lottery States : They are not responsible for what happens once they hand the designated group rep the check.In other words: Please don’t come looking for answers from us, about your rep’s actions.