If you tell them that it iws not an invoice and they pay you then they could come back after you because they paid you for something ypu clearly stated should not be paid. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message----- From: Sytze de Boer <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:49:26 To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NF] M$ wants their layoff $$ back I can't believe what I'm reading in some of these posts. I guess it shows how low some will stoop when it involves a company that is disliked I call that "selective morality" I like all the analogies used by others re finding money in the street etc. I send out program update "invitations each year, and I remoind my clients that is an invite, not an invoice. Every year, I have a minimum of 10 people who pay me on the invite as well as the invoice (which, by law, I must send when i send them a cd) Would I keep this 2nd payment ? No way So, call me an idiot. But I sleep well Sytze On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Geoff Flight <[email protected]> wrote: > If a company sends you a cheque by mistake then you are not entitled to the > money. Just as if you found a large sum of money in the street - it isn't > yours. How many times have you read about people who've had money > accidentally deposited to their accounts who went and spent it believing > they had a right to something that wasn't there. The law is pretty clear. > The morality is even clearer. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, 24 February 2009 8:53 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NF] M$ wants their layoff $$ back > > Well however they determined that some were underpaid, and if they > legitamantly where then it could be said that they "deserve" and should get > more money. Those that got overpaid, no one has said by how much, which > would be interesting to know. And second, they cashed the check and > microsoft sent the check and allowed it to be cashed. They should be > allowed > to keep the money as technically they both made a deal and both parties > accepted it. And from what i could gather from the articles microsoft is > "asking" for the money back, not "demandinga" which leads me to believe > that > there is little legal action they could do to get the money back. > > Just my 10 cents > > Mike > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sytze de Boer <[email protected]> > > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 10:07:43 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [NF] M$ wants their layoff $$ back > > > Then I must be an idiot. > Mistakes happen. Are you saying the ones who were underpaid (and who are > asking for an adjustment) are also idiots? > > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Michael Madigan > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > Only an idiot would send them back their money. > > > > ************************************************* > > 1/20/2013 Eviction Notice > > > > http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingmike/6169336 > > > > > > --- On Mon, 2/23/09, MB Software Solutions General Account < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > From: MB Software Solutions General Account < > > [email protected]> > > > Subject: [NF] M$ wants their layoff $$ back > > > To: [email protected] > > > Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 3:57 PM > > > Sad, but true: > > > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,498666,00.html > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Post Messages to: [email protected] > > > Subscription Maintenance: > > > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox > > > OT-free version of this list: > > > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech > > > Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox > > > This message: > > > > > > > http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/30928.69.7.77.20.1235422639.squirrel@ > webmail.dssco.net > > > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are > > > the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or > > > medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for > > > those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious. > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious. Report [OT] Abuse: http://leafe.com/reportAbuse/[email protected] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/966173849-1235429772-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-9450130...@bxe1268.bisx.prod.on.blackberry ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
