They are legally required to do that.  I got a similar check because an
insurance company didn't pay a claim quickly enough.  It might have been
$.02.Although they spent lots more than $.33 to mail you the check, the
alternative seems to be to keep the money.  Do you really want companies
to have a financial incentive to over-bill you 'just a bit' so they
could keep it?  For a company with millions of customers, $.33/customer
starts adding up.
> From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com] On Behalf Of
> bitbitch@magnesium.net> So I get a check from Pac Bell today (SBC as they're called now).
> Turns out, they went to the trouble of printing out, signing, sealing
> and stamping a check just to refund me for a whole $0.33.
> 
> They easily spent more than this just getting the materials together.
> Why the hell do companies bother to do this crap?  I mean, isn't there
> a bottom line in terms of cost effectiveness?  I don't think I missed
> the .33, but I sure as hell would have appreciated lower rates in lieu
> of being returned pennies.
> 
> I'm truly stuck on this though.  I don't know whether to frame the
> check, burn it, or cash it in.  Maybe I should find a way to return to
> sender, so they have to spend -more- money on giving me my .33 dues.
> 
> 
> Does .33 even buy anything anymore?  Funny bit of it, is I couldn't
> even make a phone call these days.
> 
> *boggled*
> BB.
> 
> --
> Best regards,
>  bitbitch                          mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net