I don't even want to bother CRIV with this, since I recognize the chances of
actually getting something changed in the bowels of a legal publisher's
accounting department are about the same as getting Osama bin Laden to join
the American Legion, but not having vented about anything in a while....
Why, oh Why, does this repeatedly happen. I send in a check clearly marked
as payment for Invoice A. Legal publisher ( in this latest case, RIA ),
applies part of it to pay Invoice B in it's entirety (Invoice B being for a
book I hadn't yet decided I was keeping) and only part of the payment to
Invoice A. A month later, when I pay Invoice B, instead of applying it to
the balance due on Invoice A, they call it a double payment and are in the
process (a process which apparently takes over three months) of cutting me
a refund check for the amount of Invoice B.
The whole procedure of applying payments willy-nilly to the oldest
outstanding invoice makes it virtually impossible to keep the account
straight. My records tell me I've paid Invoice Q. The publisher applies the
payment to Invoice P for a book that was lost in the mail 2 years ago or
something that I returned that they didn't credit. Not being psychic
(although this is starting to make me approach psycho) I spend months
talking to Customer Service (to a different person each time, usually)
trying to get things right. My own firm, for this very reason, applies any
check that refers to a specific invoice/charge to that invoice/charge,
regardless of how old or new it is, because to do otherwise makes for huge
headaches for our clients, and the clients will not stand for it. If our
clients won't stand for it from us, why should we stand for it from the
publishers?
Alright, I'm done. Other than that, it's a lovely day in Southern
California.
Bob Ryan
Hill, Farrer & Burrll
Los Angeles
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:33:35 PST