From fork-admin@xent.com Tue Oct 8 10:56:40 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: zzzz@localhost.example.com Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1]) by example.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C14716F03 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 10:56:40 +0100 (IST) Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1] by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0) for zzzz@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 08 Oct 2002 10:56:40 +0100 (IST) Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g981fTK28141 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 02:41:29 +0100 Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DE52940CA; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 18:41:03 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: fork@example.com Received: from homer.perfectpresence.com (unknown [209.123.207.194]) by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9E229409A for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 18:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adsl-17-226-227.jax.bellsouth.net ([68.17.226.227] helo=regina) by homer.perfectpresence.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 17yjMg-0005XL-00; Mon, 07 Oct 2002 21:40:51 -0400 From: "Geege Schuman" To: , Subject: RE: The absurdities of life. Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000001c26e44$d8780150$0200a8c0@JMHALL> X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Antiabuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-Antiabuse: Primary Hostname - homer.perfectpresence.com X-Antiabuse: Original Domain - xent.com X-Antiabuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [0 0] X-Antiabuse: Sender Address Domain - barrera.org Sender: fork-admin@xent.com Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com X-Beenthere: fork@example.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 21:39:39 -0400 what takes time and money: noting the amounts of each correction and basing the refund delivery method on the amount. yesh, it's silly to spend $.37 (+ labor and materials) for a $.02 refund, but maybe the only alternative right now is to create dichotomies that require even more time and labor - or keep the money (see john hall below). your mailed refund is a function of bulk. in jax we're on the verge of firing at&t cable for horrible customer service and over-charging. what will probably happen: if the amount of overage per customer is significant (say $30 or more) the refund will go directly to the customer. If it's less, the combined total amount will go to the city as lump sum settlement. in your case, maybe all the customers could vote on line where they'd like their lump sum to go. of courese, they'd have to be notified by mail first. :-) -----Original Message----- From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com]On Behalf Of John Hall Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 5:02 PM To: Fork@xent.com Subject: RE: The absurdities of life. They are legally required to do that. I got a similar check because an insurance company didn't pay a claim quickly enough. It might have been $.02. Although they spent lots more than $.33 to mail you the check, the alternative seems to be to keep the money. Do you really want companies to have a financial incentive to over-bill you 'just a bit' so they could keep it? For a company with millions of customers, $.33/customer starts adding up. > From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com] On Behalf Of > bitbitch@magnesium.net > So I get a check from Pac Bell today (SBC as they're called now). > Turns out, they went to the trouble of printing out, signing, sealing > and stamping a check just to refund me for a whole $0.33. > > They easily spent more than this just getting the materials together. > Why the hell do companies bother to do this crap? I mean, isn't there > a bottom line in terms of cost effectiveness? I don't think I missed > the .33, but I sure as hell would have appreciated lower rates in lieu > of being returned pennies. > > I'm truly stuck on this though. I don't know whether to frame the > check, burn it, or cash it in. Maybe I should find a way to return to > sender, so they have to spend -more- money on giving me my .33 dues. > > > Does .33 even buy anything anymore? Funny bit of it, is I couldn't > even make a phone call these days. > > *boggled* > BB. > > -- > Best regards, > bitbitch mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net