Sun Apr 29, 2012, 04:55 PM

RB TexLa (16,191 posts)

What would you think of the moral values of a person who does this?

The person signs a contract to charge $100.00 for a service. When they begin to provide that service they send a bill for $140 and say that's the market price for the service.

25 votes, 8 passes \| Time left: Unlimited
	The person has no moral values
	25 (100%)
	The person has moral values, there is nothing wrong with what they are doing
	0 (0%)
	8 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

35 replies, 2187 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

35 replies	Author	Time	Post
What would you think of the moral values of a person who does this? (Original post)	RB TexLa	Apr 2012	OP
Must have been a republican.	Stan Smith	Apr 2012	#1
But the would have	Turbineguy	Apr 2012	#2
Other: That person has at least one moral value that is different than mine. nt	ZombieHorde	Apr 2012	#3
My feel on this...	FarPoint	Apr 2012	#4
Well, if the contract had as much information as this OP has I would say...	Spazito	Apr 2012	#5
It is business. Morals do not apply. Contract law does.	FarCenter	Apr 2012	#6
Absolutely correct. And the contract	COLGATE4	Apr 2012	#8
Would he have lowered the price if the market price went down?	Frustratedlady	Apr 2012	#7
I do. . .	Journeyman	Apr 2012	#19
Good for you, but you are a rarity...unfortunately.	Frustratedlady	Apr 2012	#24
Ah, loaded polls, how I've missed you. (nt)	Posteritatis	Apr 2012	#9
I chose to pass because I feel as if there is some ulterior motive to this post.	demmiblue	Apr 2012	#10
Also no integrity. nt	gateley	Apr 2012	#11
Could I shoot someone for doing that and claim I was standing my ground?	JVS	Apr 2012	#12
No but you could plainly state that you don't drink with them	LaurenG	Apr 2012	#15
Poor RB. Maybe you should have taken that drink when it was offered.	ret5hd	Apr 2012	#13
I would say it was a health care provider if there were a lot more zeros.	OffWithTheirHeads	Apr 2012	#14
Never fails to entertain.	flvegan	Apr 2012	#16
Oh yes!	LaurenG	Apr 2012	#17
Before I add my vote, can I ask the larger context of the situation? If you'd prefer not to say,	apocalypsehow	Apr 2012	#18
Take that, lawn guy!	Union Scribe	Apr 2012	#20
Maybe next time you should drink with them.	LeftyMom	Apr 2012	#21
Contract law. Morals aside, the person providing the service is breaking the law.	saras	Apr 2012	#22
Not if there a section in the contract that allowed for an increase.	Kaleva	Apr 2012	#27
I fail to see what this has to do with morals. It is a legal issue not a moral one. If both parties	Synicus Maximus	Apr 2012	#23
True. If YOU are the person they signed a contract with, they're legally bound by the price.	Honeycombe8	Apr 2012	#30
Ahh, yes	RobertEarl	Apr 2012	#25
Worse, doctors	RB TexLa	Apr 2012	#26
Single payer is the answer then?	RobertEarl	Apr 2012	#29
No, charge more medical providers for fraud and put them in prison.	RB TexLa	Apr 2012	#32
Since when do doctors sign contracts guaranteeing their fees up front?	WillowTree	Apr 2012	#34
They sign them with preferred provider networks and then bill the insurance	RB TexLa	Apr 2012	#35
I don't sign contracts with you.	Ikonoklast	Apr 2012	#28
The legal values of the person are shaky	treestar	Apr 2012	#31
My reply #18 awaits your perusal (if you haven't seen it) or action (if you have). Thanks. n/t.	apocalypsehow	Apr 2012	#33

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 04:57 PM

Stan Smith (97 posts)

1. Must have been a republican.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 04:57 PM

Turbineguy (16,535 posts)

2. But the would have

Family Values!

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 04:58 PM

ZombieHorde (23,842 posts)

3. Other: That person has at least one moral value that is different than mine. nt

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:01 PM

FarPoint (2,360 posts)

4. My feel on this...

The contract superseded the mailed bill. The contractor could say the bill just reflects a cost savings and accept the terms of the agreement.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:03 PM

Spazito (26,463 posts)

5. Well, if the contract had as much information as this OP has I would say...

Buyer Beware.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:05 PM

FarCenter (13,044 posts)

6. It is business. Morals do not apply. Contract law does.

Reply to this post

Response to FarCenter (Reply #6)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:20 PM

COLGATE4 (4,314 posts)

8. Absolutely correct. And the contract

calls for payment of $100.00, not $140.00. Victim only has to pay $100.00

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:17 PM

Frustratedlady (8,907 posts)

7. Would he have lowered the price if the market price went down?

In your dreams.

Reply to this post

Response to Frustratedlady (Reply #7)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:40 PM

Journeyman (9,197 posts)

19. I do. . .

If the price of materials goes down, or a project proves easier than originally estimated, we charge less for it. It's the correct and proper thing to do. It is, in fact, in keeping with the "golden rule."

Cash register honesty. It's the easiest form of honesty there is.

Reply to this post

Response to Journeyman (Reply #19)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 08:30 PM

Frustratedlady (8,907 posts)

24. Good for you, but you are a rarity...unfortunately.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:23 PM

Posteritatis (17,264 posts)

9. Ah, loaded polls, how I've missed you. (nt)

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:25 PM

demmiblue (5,203 posts)

10. I chose to pass because I feel as if there is some ulterior motive to this post.

Lol, I may be paranoid!

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:28 PM

gateley (61,882 posts)

11. Also no integrity. nt

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:31 PM

JVS (60,524 posts)

12. Could I shoot someone for doing that and claim I was standing my ground?

Reply to this post

Response to JVS (Reply #12)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:44 PM

LaurenG (24,674 posts)

15. No but you could plainly state that you don't drink with them

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:31 PM

ret5hd (10,073 posts)

13. Poor RB. Maybe you should have taken that drink when it was offered.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 05:36 PM

OffWithTheirHeads (9,031 posts)

14. I would say it was a health care provider if there were a lot more zeros.

What other business, you go in for service, they won't tell you how much it will cost, your insurance pays them an amount they seem to pull out of their ass, and you get a bill (with no explaination of what you are paying for) for several thousands of dollars that you are expected to pay immediatly?

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:10 PM

flvegan (62,152 posts)

16. Never fails to entertain.

Because $40 is ultimately the all-or-nothing item to decide if someone has any moral values whatsoever.

Reply to this post

Response to flvegan (Reply #16)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:19 PM

LaurenG (24,674 posts)

17. Oh yes!

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:21 PM

apocalypsehow (12,751 posts)

18. Before I add my vote, can I ask the larger context of the situation? If you'd prefer not to say,

I'll understand, but it's got my curiosity. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:45 PM

Union Scribe (4,703 posts)

20. Take that, lawn guy!

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:46 PM

LeftyMom (44,453 posts)

21. Maybe next time you should drink with them.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:48 PM

saras (6,670 posts)

22. Contract law. Morals aside, the person providing the service is breaking the law.

It's also possible for people to have different, incompatible moral systems, of which one isn't always "better" than the other, though sometimes that clearly is the case.

Reply to this post

Response to saras (Reply #22)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 09:10 PM

Kaleva (11,406 posts)

27. Not if there a section in the contract that allowed for an increase.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 06:50 PM

Synicus Maximus (860 posts)

23. I fail to see what this has to do with morals. It is a legal issue not a moral one. If both parties

signed a contract calling for the payment of $100 the fact that the provider is asking for more is not an issue.

Reply to this post

Response to Synicus Maximus (Reply #23)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 10:15 PM

Honeycombe8 (18,006 posts)

30. True. If YOU are the person they signed a contract with, they're legally bound by the price.

Unless there are exeptions in the contract that are not vague.

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 08:58 PM

RobertEarl (2,874 posts)

25. Ahh, yes

Defense department contractors, eh?

Reply to this post

Response to RobertEarl (Reply #25)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 09:01 PM

RB TexLa (16,191 posts)

26. Worse, doctors

Reply to this post

Response to RB TexLa (Reply #26)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 10:11 PM

RobertEarl (2,874 posts)

29. Single payer is the answer then?

If the government would just make all of us US soldiers, we'd all have health care with government the single payer. Then doctors could be brought under control?

Reply to this post

Response to RobertEarl (Reply #29)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 10:32 PM

RB TexLa (16,191 posts)