Quote from: PuertoLibre on January 15, 2014, 04:00:52 AM

Quote from: Gandalfs Mentor on January 15, 2014, 03:43:51 AM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on January 15, 2014, 03:29:18 AM

Quote from: Gandalfs Mentor on January 15, 2014, 03:21:51 AM

Quote from: joshv06 on January 15, 2014, 03:01:38 AM

Quote from: PuertoLibre on January 15, 2014, 02:57:44 AM

Quote from: MrTeal on January 15, 2014, 12:15:48 AM

Batch 1, Paid BTC, Canadian, and received an unsolicited USD refund cheque today.

Are you going to cash it?

I don't think he has a choice.

They're really fucking us over.

Typically a bank draft (Check) of which one is attempting to buy another off, in the case of a settlement, will be a 'Conditional Draft' (should have something on it to the effect of 'For payment of refund in full')
Cashing one of these types of checks will be viewed by the courts as an accepted settlement; a draft is a signed contract.

The flip side is if you did not request a refund, specifically have not provided them with any signed documentation to that effect and paid in bitcoins, then they just sent you a check...

Personally, I would cash it, then demand a refund of my BTC as per contract. If their accountant goofed and sent you a check in error, then they need to get a refund from you.

Does not your contract state to be reimbursed in BTC?

That would be fraud. You would have to first check with the letter as to what the intent is behind the check.

Two wrongs don't make a right and certainly don't strengthen anyones case.

Please qualify your statement, define where in what I stated you believe is fraud-

And you are correct, two wrongs do not make a right. A 5% refund in lew of a contract is not right. As stated if the draft itself is not conditional, specifically stating it is for a refund, then it is the same thing as them handing you cash. What ever toilet paper came with it in the envelope doesn't matter. Just don't sign your rights away.

Further I always recommend consultation with a qualified professionally licensed individual.

To Me it sounds like they may have just royally screwed themselves and sent you guys a whole bunch of money to pay your Attorney with to get your BTC back... Wouldn't that be ironic Shocked

http://s21.postimg.org/bafngjfav/download_3.jpgIt says it right there in black and white.

This is for a refund you requested.
It does not say "...this is part of your refund. (1 of 10)"

If you cash it, you are signifying you accept their payment + 5%.

============================

Gandalf, if they weren't worried about the legal stuff they wouldn't offer you 5% for free. They are giving you 5% on top of the value of the miner as a settlement.

If they had only given you the cost of the miner and no 5% it would have been clear they were playing hardball. They are instead just seemingly playing "dead possum" and hoping (to the love of God) that their customers are stupid enough to accept their 5% (which is actually almost -90% by the way).

If things go tits up and everyone decided to pursue other options, then HashFast is almost certainly done for. (Unless they can find 10 times their capital)

Batch 2 through 4 can kiss their own asses goodbye as a result.

People are either going to live up to HashFasts [I speculate] expectations, or they will be smarter than that.

============================

Accepting a check with a written notice as to what is for is not arbitration. You don't get to "invent" what you think the check is for. It is clearly spelled out what it is for. If you stand there in front of the judge stating your own arbitrary ideas and concepts about what the check was for and thought of using their own settlement money to persue a resolved dispute which you accepted....well...don't be surprised if you are laughed out of court.

You're not Dumb or Blonde Gandalf, so stop trying to lure idiots into the fire.

Just because tensions are high don't shoot the messenger or think for a moment I don't know thoroughly of that which I am speaking. I have previously reviewed all documentation you provided.

The individuals doc presented is for a requested refund; my original response was to an un requested refund.

The check itself is a contract that must bear the conditional upon it "Refund" or appropriate legalese to similar effect.
The purchase agreement is also a contract that in some cases defines refund in BTC.
The intent of the original instrument (purchase agreement) is clear
The intent of the draft be it properly labeled as such or not is clear
The draft does not abate the validity of the original separate instrument.

The draft can easily be construed as a partial refund if it does not clearly state on the draft itself for refund in full.

Consult your local consul, both legal and mental

Edit addendum: Note that nowhere on the front of the physical draft presented above is anything to the effect of refund of any sort; as far as the back goes??? Further the draft, from the photo, appears to be a separate document from the letter. It appears as it is not a tear off, but that it was simply set upon the letter for the photo.

Cura tibi est?