Race wants prize money back

No it is NOTHING like your BK analogy. Here is a better one.

BK advertises their Whopper for $2. You order the Whopper, pay for the Whopper and then eat the Whopper. 2 weeks later a manager from BK contacts you to let you that because of his mistake you were under charged and the Whopper is really $4. He further notifies you that if you don't pay the extra $2 he will sue you for it.

You are not a dumb guy Flagpole so I don't know how you even came up with your original analogy.

As far as I am concerned, all turned out well and the RD done the right (or maybe BETTER you could argue) thing and let it go. I hope his race continues to grow and succeed.

The clearest evidence in this case was that the RD himself misunderstood the prize structure many times over more than one year of the race. This is forgivable but you can't fairly accuse others of doing the same for profit. However I suggest that the real error was the manner he went about trying to bully people with legal threats instead of a polite "I screwed up" letter. That forfeits the ability to shame people into returning money.

No...I get it. The mistake just happened at a different time than you seem to think is acceptable, but the end result is the same...a human error that led to more money being given than should have been. Unfortunate, but wrong for the runner to keep it.

Interesting stuff wrote:

runnerist wrote:

Poor analogy if you want to win this arguement. There have been several cases in which a store did the exact same thing and the store won the case because of the error.

Give 1 example of that situation happening in real life. Just 1 is all I ask. A situation in which 3 different prices said an identical amount, the person paid it, and the person was then later (much later) forced to pay even more.

Just 1.

Seriously? Google it, You won't find one, you'll find several. Do your homework before you post on this thread. mmmmkay?

But here the runner is George Bailey and the race directer is Mr. Potter.

Why take money that doesn't belong to you? Just give half of it back.

Flagpole wrote:

No...I get it. The mistake just happened at a different time than you seem to think is acceptable, but the end result is the same...a human error that led to more money being given than should have been. Unfortunate, but wrong for the runner to keep it.

I think another problem with this situation is that the runner isn't really "keeping" this money. As the OP explained, he spent that money. So I actually would agree with you, Flagpole, up until the time that the prize winner has spent the money. If you catch the mistake the next day, then fine. But once you wait a couple of weeks, the money may be gone, and in that case, I think the moral argument of "keeping vs returning" the money is down the toilet.

(And, yes, I understand that money is fungible, but it's fair to say that making a decision based on these newly-acquired funds is the equivalent of spending the money that was earned...)

way too many law school dropouts in this thread

Every example of you buying something is TOTALLY in applicable.

How did he spend that "money" exactly? How do we know the mney spent wasn't from other earnings?

There is a difference of what may be right in the eyes of the law and what is ethically right.

Flagpole wrote:

Interesting stuff wrote:

You're not getting this.... The website said $ amount, they wrote large checks and took pictures holding them for that same $ amount. They then sent the same $ amount to these athletes in the mail on a real check. A month later they send a letter saying that the athlete should give back half the money.

If the prize winnings said, let's say, $1000. Now let's say that the large checks said $1000, and the athlete received a $1500 check. In that situation I would totally understand giving the money back, but not in the situation that actually happened.

No...I get it. The mistake just happened at a different time than you seem to think is acceptable, but the end result is the same...a human error that led to more money being given than should have been. Unfortunate, but wrong for the runner to keep it.

I'm beginning to rethink my line about you not being dumb. That or you are just trolling now.

In your misguided analogy the customer knows EXACTLY what the price is and he agrees to pay it. If he knowingly, before the transaction is complete, accepts more change than he knows he should then you have a good case for a moral situation. The customer knew the price and agreed to the price and knowingly benefited from someone's mistake when he could have easily pointed it out at the point of the transaction.

That is nothing like this situation. The consumer (the runner), AND the RD both agreed on an amount for the prize and later the RD changed that amount AFTER the 'transaction', the race, was well over with and the money spent. And Yes, the RD did agree to the amount because he wrote 2 checks for that amount, the big fake prize check and the real one.

It is funny how this thread was about dead with the RD making a decision and things calming down and then Flagpole comes in with his 'I'm absolutely right and everyone else is wrong' attitude. The rest of this thread will only be about Flagpole. Funny how he seems to do that to threads.

But he is absolutely right.

But he is absolutely right.[/quote]

Flagpole has a new screen name.

From a legal perspective, they probably don't have a leg to stand on, you should keep the money. They are harassing you. If you feel torn on an ethical level, just look at their financials. They are not as inefficient as a lot of the telemarketing firms that call on people asking for donations (many of which end up paying out less than 1% in services on the revenue they collect, as most of the funds go back to the telemarketing firm that is doing the fundraising), but considerably less efficient than a lot of larger charities that typically pay out 80% in benefits, with 20% to cover administration and fund raising costs. This charity only pays out a little over 20% in actual services. There are more efficient ways to pay that money back, and you should write off the donation as a charitable contribution on your taxes.

every single time wrote:

The rest of this thread will only be about Flagpole. Funny how he seems to do that to threads.

Only because of you and all the other idiots who reply to him.

the realist wrote:

Raysism wrote:

I think another problem with this situation is that the runner isn't really "keeping" this money. As the OP explained, he spent that money. So I actually would agree with you, Flagpole, up until the time that the prize winner has spent the money. If you catch the mistake the next day, then fine. But once you wait a couple of weeks, the money may be gone, and in that case, I think the moral argument of "keeping vs returning" the money is down the toilet.

(And, yes, I understand that money is fungible, but it's fair to say that making a decision based on these newly-acquired funds is the equivalent of spending the money that was earned...)

How did he spend that "money" exactly? How do we know the mney spent wasn't from other earnings?

I answered this question before you asked it.

runnerist wrote:

Interesting stuff wrote:

Give 1 example of that situation happening in real life. Just 1 is all I ask. A situation in which 3 different prices said an identical amount, the person paid it, and the person was then later (much later) forced to pay even more.

Just 1.

Seriously? Google it, You won't find one, you'll find several. Do your homework before you post on this thread. mmmmkay?

So, what you're saying is that you don't have any links to back up what you're saying. You're the one who made the claim that "There have been several cases....." The ball is in your court to back it up, not mine to go out and look for it since I didn't make the claim.

They actually paid 83% out. Take a closer look at their financials. They've given out 137k so far and their cost were $219k if you do the math. Just my perspective as an accountant.

It actually quite impressive how much they've given. Look at their organizations website to get an accurate picture of their donation.

http://surfingmadonna.org/where-the-money-goes/

A Running Christmas Carol.

This non-profit is peanut-change and looks OK.

Look at what the big guys, the non-profit marathons, give themselves for salaries. Wonder 'thons costs so much.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6732210&page=2