Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I found this case quite interesting. While typically known overpayments for services and such are required to be returned, this one seems to have a slightly different tone to it.
I think in her three attempted calls she made, along with her having spent the money, she might have a case to keep it.
At the very worst, she could file bankruptcy, even if she lost. I think ND's allegations of fraud are way too strong here.
Notre Dame sues ex-worker over $29,000 tip - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_odd_notre_dame_big_tip - broken link)
"A phone message left at the only number listed in the Granger area under the name Gaspar was not immediately returned."
This is an outrage. They need to return their calls. Thank goodness, the news media is keeping us abreast of this compelling phone-tag saga. It wouldn't matter if they called back or not, since, judging by the news stories Ive been seeing lately, reporters never ask the questions I want to hear the answers to, anyway.
As for the sidebar about the tip. I think Notre Dame ought to go to the Vatican and sit down with the Pope in "The Gold Room", and ask the advice of the infallible Holy Father about this two pounds of gold that was originally stolen from the late and unhappy Inca infidels by the conquistadors to adorn the very room they are sitting in, and is therefore the lawful property of the church.
She is an idiot for spending it. I think most states allow employers to recover over-payment due to an error.
It was not an overpayment, it was a tip. From a legal standing, there is a difference. I agree, she is an idiot. I would have demanded written notice the money was mine. However, the law protects idiots in some cases. The fact that is was given as a tip, could change the legal standing here. The fact it appears she made two honest efforts to contact them, with no response works in her favor too.
Also, I think it is overkill for them to pursue fraud in this case. It is being used to intimidate her. However, in many cases judges can be angered when intimidation tactics are used.
I agree that being a tip makes a difference. Ordinarily a tender is an exchange for what can be represented as equal or agreed-upon value. In the case of a gratuity, the monetary value of the payment is not tied the stated value of the goods or services rendered. A person receivig a tip that seems disproportionate is obliged to say only two things: "Are you sure this is what you intend to do" and "Thank you very much". She is in compliance.
One wonders if the woman would prevail in a lawsuit if she had been given a 29-cent tip and thought she ought to have received more, and inquired twice and received no reply.
I say, spend it. Not her problem. Notre Dame just needs to suck it up. Sad though, the person who made the error probably lost her job.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
