Pa. woman claims winning $131.5M Powerball ticket
$131.5M Pa. Powerball winner makes herself scarce
UPPER DARBY — It appears that Patricia Chandler hit the lottery and hightailed it out of Upper Darby.
No one answered the door at Chandler's home this week — or a few weeks ago — when a Philadelphia Daily News reporter came knocking in search of the new millionaire.
Lottery officials said that Chandler came forward to claim the $131.5 million annuity Powerball jackpot drawn on June 22. Chandler opted for the $77.4 million cash lump sum.
“She's probably already out of the neighborhood. My assumption is she's gone,” Upper Darby police Superintendent Michael Chitwood said on Wednesday, adding that police haven't heard from the woman since she won. “Maybe she'll buy the block and refurbish it,” Chitwood said.
She bought the ticket at a beer distributorship. The store's owner, Gary Patel, received a $100,000 bonus for selling the winner.
Chandler hasn't commented publicly. She doesn't have the cash in hand; the lottery says it will take four to six weeks.
The odds of winning the jackpot she claimed were 1 in 175,223,510.
Near the address listed in property records for Chandler, her neighbors slammed their doors when a reporter approached to talk.
A lone insurance salesman from Havertown who did not identify himself loitered in front of Chandler's house, hoping to sell her some insurance for the newfound fortune.
— From wire reports
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.