Race wants prize money back

Flagpole wrote:

Interesting stuff wrote:

No, you're incorreect Flagpole. It would not be the same as a cashier giving you the incorrect amount back. It would instead be the same as a store advertising a price online of $5, you go into the store and see the price tag of $5, you get to the cash register and they ask for $5. You pay the $5 and go on your merry way. You get a letter in the mail a month later saying "Hey so it's actually $10, you should send us another $5 or we'll sue.

Same thing...just the passage of time and to a different degree. And in your example, you could just return the merchandise and say you don't want it for $10 -- can't do that with the race.

Like I said earlier, if the race immediately went to the "we will sue" line, then that's bad form, but it still was a mistake on someone's part, and if properly described (and it seems like it has been) then the money should be returned.

Now, that said, if I were on the side of the race, I would decide that we made a horrible mistake that we must eat and then plan to not make that mistake again. BUT, since they decided to go forward with trying to get that money back, the right thing IN THIS CASE is to give it back.

People don't like to do the right thing when it involves losing some money, but it is the right thing here.

Flagpole wrote:

Interesting stuff wrote:

No, you're incorreect Flagpole. It would not be the same as a cashier giving you the incorrect amount back. It would instead be the same as a store advertising a price online of $5, you go into the store and see the price tag of $5, you get to the cash register and they ask for $5. You pay the $5 and go on your merry way. You get a letter in the mail a month later saying "Hey so it's actually $10, you should send us another $5 or we'll sue.

Same thing...just the passage of time and to a different degree. And in your example, you could just return the merchandise and say you don't want it for $10 -- can't do that with the race.

Like I said earlier, if the race immediately went to the "we will sue" line, then that's bad form, but it still was a mistake on someone's part, and if properly described (and it seems like it has been) then the money should be returned.

Now, that said, if I were on the side of the race, I would decide that we made a horrible mistake that we must eat and then plan to not make that mistake again. BUT, since they decided to go forward with trying to get that money back, the right thing IN THIS CASE is to give it back.

People don't like to do the right thing when it involves losing some money, but it is the right thing here.

Interesting stuff wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

This mistake by the race is the exact same as a Burger King cashier mistakenly giving you back $10 instead of $5...it's just that it is a bigger degree. If you would give the Burger King employee the extra money back (and you should) then you should do the same to the race.

How is this even arguable? Sorry if I have to be the voice of reason, but there are wrong and right ways to go about your life, and keeping money that was mistakenly given to you (EVEN IF IT WAS MISTAKENLY ADVERTISED) is wrong.

I hate to use this next example because it makes it all about the individual, but imagine if you make the mistake and could possibly be on the hook for that money (or lose your job)...wouldn't you want the people to give the money back? BUT, integrity involves doing the right thing EVEN IF you couldn't imagine the same thing happening to you. Right is right.

I'm not saying the OP shouldn't be a little pissed about it. We have a right to be upset by mistakes that happen, BUT how you deal with them should matter, and the right thing here is to give back the money that they want returned.

Sad that I even have to defend this position.

No, you're incorreect Flagpole. It would not be the same as a cashier giving you the incorrect amount back. It would instead be the same as a store advertising a price online of $5, you go into the store and see the price tag of $5, you get to the cash register and they ask for $5. You pay the $5 and go on your merry way. You get a letter in the mail a month later saying "Hey so it's actually $10, you should send us another $5 or we'll sue.

WiT wrote:

Rdsurfingmadonna wrote:

Sorry about the long reply.....

You view this as a fund raising social event. Some athletes view this as a race with prize money and that is an earning opportunity to them.

Neither you or them are wrong. Ask for the money back, take what you get gratefully and move on.

I suggest:

Next year give out no performance based cash prizes at all..

Write up the circumstances surrounding your mistakes . . Indicate that overwhelmed with the demands of devoting most of your waking hours to doing good deeds you did not realize you had written a misleading prize structure and compounding that had written checks and paid out more prize money than you intended. Explain that those who saw the event as a charity event gave back their prize money and those who viewed it as a pay for performance opportunity did not. This brought you to the realization that paying performance bonuses is not in the spirit of your event. It attracts people who want to make money and this is not the intent of the event.. Perhaps you will come to the conclusion all cash rewards take away money to fund the charity and stop all the cash prizes.

Yeah you will not get the entry fee from those few who enter because of the prize money but you will not have the expense of prize money and no chance to put yourself in a situation where you hurt the organization by not paying attention to details of the cash flow.

Keep up the good deeds and understand running for prize money is a business for some and they take earning as seriously as you take giving.

Flagpole wrote:

Raysism wrote:

Flagpole, just curious to see how far you think this analogy goes:

Say the guy who bought your house a year ago calls you out of the blue, and says that he knows he told you he'd pay $200,000 for the house and he knows that he in fact gave you $200,000, but he really meant $100,000. Honest mistake.

Would you give him back $100,000? If not, would you seriously consider unwinding the transaction and giving him all of the money back and taking back title to the house?

Not a possible situation...we sat with an attorney, went over everything together with a fine-toothed comb and agreed on the spot and signed everything. Besides, all of these examples about paying for something (even though I also did one) are a bit different than getting prize money. When you pay for something, you agree to pay for that item based on the price, and then if the price changes or is changed, you can then decide NOT to buy (and you must give the item back). With a race and prize money, it is different...but again, for clarity, the situation you present could not happen.

Also, let's not confuse giving the money back with saying that the other party didn't make a HUGE mistake and then they really have no leg to stand on in asking for it back. BUT, when they DO ask for it back and the reason for the mistake is clear, the right thing to do (albeit painful) is to give the money back. Greed should not define us.

Flagpole wrote:

Raysism wrote:

Flagpole, just curious to see how far you think this analogy goes:

Say the guy who bought your house a year ago calls you out of the blue, and says that he knows he told you he'd pay $200,000 for the house and he knows that he in fact gave you $200,000, but he really meant $100,000. Honest mistake.

Would you give him back $100,000? If not, would you seriously consider unwinding the transaction and giving him all of the money back and taking back title to the house?

Not a possible situation...we sat with an attorney, went over everything together with a fine-toothed comb and agreed on the spot and signed everything. Besides, all of these examples about paying for something (even though I also did one) are a bit different than getting prize money. When you pay for something, you agree to pay for that item based on the price, and then if the price changes or is changed, you can then decide NOT to buy (and you must give the item back). With a race and prize money, it is different...but again, for clarity, the situation you present could not happen.

Also, let's not confuse giving the money back with saying that the other party didn't make a HUGE mistake and then they really have no leg to stand on in asking for it back. BUT, when they DO ask for it back and the reason for the mistake is clear, the right thing to do (albeit painful) is to give the money back. Greed should not define us.

Flagpole wrote:

Not a possible situation...we sat with an attorney, went over everything together with a fine-toothed comb and agreed on the spot and signed everything. Besides, all of these examples about paying for something (even though I also did one) are a bit different than getting prize money. When you pay for something, you agree to pay for that item based on the price, and then if the price changes or is changed, you can then decide NOT to buy (and you must give the item back). With a race and prize money, it is different...but again, for clarity, the situation you present could not happen.

Also, let's not confuse giving the money back with saying that the other party didn't make a HUGE mistake and then they really have no leg to stand on in asking for it back. BUT, when they DO ask for it back and the reason for the mistake is clear, the right thing to do (albeit painful) is to give the money back. Greed should not define us.

Flagpole wrote:

ALSO...

...not that the law is any indication of what is morally right, but there's a lot of info on this topic here -

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/company-advertising-price-wrong-responsible-mistake-73117.html

I'll pull out some pertinents:

"In general, there's no law that requires companies to honor an advertised price if that price is wrong. Typographical errors, miscommunication and other glitches can result in items being offered at what appear to be deep discounts -- discounts that would be ruinous for the company if it were forced to honor them. Laws against false or deceptive advertising require an intent to deceive on the part of the advertiser. If a company can demonstrate that an advertised price was simply a mistake, then it's not false advertising. Still, if the mistake isn't too big, it may be in the company's best interest to honor the advertised price rather than anger so many potential customers."

Flagpole wrote:

Raysism wrote:

Flagpole, just curious to see how far you think this analogy goes:

Say the guy who bought your house a year ago calls you out of the blue, and says that he knows he told you he'd pay $200,000 for the house and he knows that he in fact gave you $200,000, but he really meant $100,000. Honest mistake.

Would you give him back $100,000? If not, would you seriously consider unwinding the transaction and giving him all of the money back and taking back title to the house?

Not a possible situation...we sat with an attorney, went over everything together with a fine-toothed comb and agreed on the spot and signed everything. Besides, all of these examples about paying for something (even though I also did one) are a bit different than getting prize money. When you pay for something, you agree to pay for that item based on the price, and then if the price changes or is changed, you can then decide NOT to buy (and you must give the item back). With a race and prize money, it is different...but again, for clarity, the situation you present could not happen.

Also, let's not confuse giving the money back with saying that the other party didn't make a HUGE mistake and then they really have no leg to stand on in asking for it back. BUT, when they DO ask for it back and the reason for the mistake is clear, the right thing to do (albeit painful) is to give the money back. Greed should not define us.