Paying with pennies

[HCGLNS]

I'm enough of an * to do something like that, so I think I'm also willing to find the humour in it if someone did that to me, too.

However, I recently learned that in Alberta, apparently it is against the law to pay for something greater than $1 in only pennies, unless it is a government payment (taxes, fines, etc.). I wonder if the penalty for it is a fine, though, because you could then pay *that* in all pennies.

(2) A payment in coins referred to in subsection (1) is a legal tender for no more than the following amounts for the following denominations of coins:

(a) forty dollars if the denomination is two dollars or greater but does not exceed ten dollars;

(b) twenty-five dollars if the denomination is one dollar;

(c) ten dollars if the denomination is ten cents or greater but less than one dollar;

(d) five dollars if the denomination is five cents; and

(e) twenty-five cents if the denomination is one cent.

Still no love for the 50 cent piece. :angry:

 

[Tinwhistler]

I imagine it's archaic and not applicable anymore, as I don't believe that any bills that are currently legal tender actually

Wait wait wait.

I have to find actual legal precedent that coins are considered legal tender, and we have to go by your IMAGINATION?

Find me a case.

 

[figmentPez]

So if I've never seen a legal precedent saying so, I can go knock over a liquor store because the statute doesn't specify "liquor stores"?

Doesn't matter if you've seen it or not, the fact is that there is plenty of legal precedent to support that robbing a liquor store is just as much robbery of any other establishment. Nor have you asserted any reasonable logic as to why it would not be considered theft to steal from a store, regardless of what it sells.

 

[Bowielee]

People keep saying this, but I have yet to see a precident. If it was a crime, why wasn't the girl arrested?

How bout I just show you the law, numbskull?

31 U.S.C. § 5103.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/5103.shtml

As Figmentpez linked earlier.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1120208723965

Missing the point again Bowie. That's just an assistance to Tin's argument. The coin is still legal tender and must be taken.

Whether someone wants to charge them for the hassle later is a different argument all together.

You obviously didn't read the article. The lawyer refused to take the payments in pennies. And the judge upheld that decision and fined him for basically wasting the court's time.

The long and the short of it, is that this guy created a situation where he would be wasting police's time. My original problem with this is the fact that while the police are being jerked around at this tow playce, real serieous crimes could be being ignored.
'
And yes, it is all his fault as he began the situation that started this by parking illegally in the first place.

 

[Tinwhistler]

You obviously didn't read the article. The lawyer refused to take the payments in pennies. And the judge upheld that decision and fined him for basically wasting the court's time.

WRONG.

Tarlton [the lawyer] testified that after he tracked down the "originating bank ... that gave or sold Mr. Powell the pennies," the bank agreed to redeem the pounds of pennies for a price. Tarlton was seeking reimbursement for the $100 bank redemption fee and an additional "$412.44" -- the "2.7496" hours he spent redeeming the pennies at his "non-court rate of $150 an hour."

The lawyer redeemed the pennies.
He then billed the guy $512.44, which the court upheld.
Look twice before claiming someone else has a problem with reading comprehension

 

[Bowielee]

You obviously didn't read the article. The lawyer refused to take the payments in pennies. And the judge upheld that decision and fined him for basically wasting the court's time.

WRONG.

Tarlton [the lawyer] testified that after he tracked down the "originating bank ... that gave or sold Mr. Powell the pennies," the bank agreed to redeem the pounds of pennies for a price. Tarlton was seeking reimbursement for the $100 bank redemption fee and an additional "$412.44" -- the "2.7496" hours he spent redeeming the pennies at his "non-court rate of $150 an hour."

The lawyer redeemed the pennies.
Look twice before claiming someone else has a problem with reading comprehension

He did because the guy just left them in his lobby and refused to take them away.

 

[Tinwhistler]

He did because the guy just left them in his lobby and refused to take them away.

So? he took the $1000 in pennies, and it was applied to the guy's debt.

THE LAWYER TOOK THE PENNIES. He was required to. Just because he tried to get out of it doesn't change the fact that $1000 in pennies was upheld as a valid payment of the $1000 debt.

if someone tried to pay me a debt in pennies, I'd try to get out of it too. But if they were adamant, I'd be forced to take the pennies.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Furthermore, it makes no mention of reasonable limitations on the size of a debt that can be paid for in the smallest denomination of coin.

"Hmm, this law doesn't take into account that someone will use it to be a douchebag. Therefore, it's not really a law."

 

[Shegokigo]

I have a feeling that Figment and Bowie are pulling a JCM and flat out ignoring facts because their personal opinion is immovable.

I'm still waiting for Figment to show legal precident of his side of this, specially since Tin already did. Twice.

 

[Bowielee]

Fine you all are right. The letter of the law should always be enforced. Have fun with the police state.

 

[figmentPez]

I imagine it's archaic and not applicable anymore, as I don't believe that any bills that are currently legal tender actually

Wait wait wait.

I have to find actual legal precedent that coins are considered legal tender, and we have to go by your IMAGINATION?

Find me a case.

*SIGH* I give up, I don't have the time to waste on this. If you want to believe that the US never discontinued the printing of money backed by gold and silver, and stopped allowing silver certificates to be redeemed for silver, I'm not going to try and disillusion you. You're welcome to attempt to pay in confederate money while you're at it. You're also welcome to try and have me arrested if you ever try and pull some sort of dumb stunt like the moron in the video did. I won't be taking your pennies, and I don't care what you think the law says.

From the US Treasury Department website:
"There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy."
Is anyone certain this towing company was government, and not a private contractor?

THE LAWYER TOOK THE PENNIES. He was required to.

I don't recall the article saying he was required to, merely that he did.

 

[Tinwhistler]

I have a feeling that Figment and Bowie are pulling a JCM and flat out ignoring facts because their personal opinion is immovable.

I'm still waiting for Figment to show legal precident of his side of this, specially since Tin already did. Twice.

The full relavant paragraph (emphases mine) of Thompson v. Butler, 95 U.S. 694, 696, which was a supreme court case:

We have no jurisdiction if the sum or value of the matter in dispute does not exceed $5,000. One
owing a debt may pay it in good coin or legal- tender notes of the United States, as he chooses, unless
there is something to the contrary in the obligation out of which the debt arises. A coin dollar is worth
no more for the purposes of tender in payment of an ordinary debt than a note dollar.

-- Sun Aug 02, 2009 2:02 pm --

Find me a case.

*SIGH* I give up, I don't have the time to waste on this.

LOL! Why am I not surprised?

 

[Bowielee]

From the US Treasury Department website:
\"There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy.\"
Is anyone certain this towing company was government, and not a private contractor?

The states don't own any towing companies, they contract with private companies.

 

[Tinwhistler]

From the US Treasury Department website:
\"There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy.\"
Is anyone certain this towing company was government, and not a private contractor?

The states don't own any towing companies, they contract with private companies.

Read up. There's more to that site, which I quote above. He omits an entire paragraph from the treasury department website that discusses debts and contractual obligations. Legal tender must be accepted for those. Find me legal precedent where coinage was refused for a debt. So far, all three cases we discuss, coins were perfectly acceptable for a debt, including the supreme court's opinion that a person may pay a debt in coin or folding money, AS THEY CHOOSE.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Fine you all are right. The letter of the law should always be enforced. Have fun with the police state.

If a law is wrong, it should be changed. However, you know perfectly well that society isn't going to function with people running around going "Well, I see what's written, but I know what the law really means" or "I know what laws should be enforced, even if other people don't" or "I like these laws, but not those laws, and police can enforce whichever laws they like and not the ones they don't." Then you turn law into... well, religion, pretty much.

If a law is a problem, it has to go through the system of courts or lawmakers to the point where it can be changed. That's not to be done by police responding to a call. They are upholding the law, not making it up as they go.

 

[Tinwhistler]

no, no. escushion. Just ask figment....supreme court decisions go bad if they're old. You know, like an avocado or something.

 

[Shegokigo]

Oh noes!

 

[figmentPez]

The full relavant paragraph (emphases mine) of Thompson v. Butler, 95 U.S. 694, 696, which was a supreme court case:

We have no jurisdiction if the sum or value of the matter in dispute does not exceed $5,000. One
owing a debt may pay it in good coin or legal- tender notes of the United States, as he chooses, unless
there is something to the contrary in the obligation out of which the debt arises. A coin dollar is worth
no more for the purposes of tender in payment of an ordinary debt than a note dollar.

You're citing a case where the conflict was over payment in bills versus gold and silver coin. Bills that were, in 1877, backed by gold and silver, and had a different value in the market than their coin equivalents, despite that. The ruling has absolutely no bearing on the difference between 8,800 pennies and an equivalent amount in bills, because the substantial difference is not in market value, but in weather it is a reasonable manner in which to pay a debt.

-- Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:13 pm --

I'm still waiting for Figment to show legal precident of his side of this, specially since Tin already did. Twice.

No, he has not. He has successfully bluffed you into thinking he has found relevant cases, but despite the quotes sounding good, the context does not uphold his position.

*sigh* we live in a sound-bite society where context holds no sway.

 

[Shegokigo]

No, he has not. He has successfully bluffed you into thinking he has found relevant cases, but despite the quotes sounding good, the context does not uphold his position.

*sigh* we live in a sound-bite society where context holds no sway.

And your "proof" is where? Since we're not going in context here.

 

[Tinwhistler]

One owing a debt may pay it in good coin or legal-tender notes of the United States, as he chooses

You're citing a case where the conflict was over payment in bills versus gold and silver coin. Bills that were, in 1877, backed by gold and silver, and had a different value in the market than their coin equivalents, despite that. The ruling has absolutely no bearing on the difference between 8,800 pennies and an equivalent amount in bills, because the substantial difference is not in market value, but in weather it is a reasonable manner in which to pay a debt.

The wording is unambiguous. Try to talk it away all you like, you have yet to show a case that sets contrary legal precedent.

C'mon now..We've discussed three cases so far in which coins were considered legal tender for a debt.
Come on..show me just one in which the opposite is true.

 

[Chad Sexington]

I'm enough of an * to do something like that, so I think I'm also willing to find the humour in it if someone did that to me, too.

However, I recently learned that in Alberta, apparently it is against the law to pay for something greater than $1 in only pennies, unless it is a government payment (taxes, fines, etc.). I wonder if the penalty for it is a fine, though, because you could then pay *that* in all pennies.

(2) A payment in coins referred to in subsection (1) is a legal tender for no more than the following amounts for the following denominations of coins:

(a) forty dollars if the denomination is two dollars or greater but does not exceed ten dollars;

(b) twenty-five dollars if the denomination is one dollar;

(c) ten dollars if the denomination is ten cents or greater but less than one dollar;

(d) five dollars if the denomination is five cents; and

(e) twenty-five cents if the denomination is one cent.

Still no love for the 50 cent piece. :angry:

Huh so it's even less than I was told. Neat. Well keeps us from too much counting I guess.

Also, perhaps it just means you can pay for anything in any amount with 50 cent pieces.

 

I got exactly 30 seconds into this video.

Douchecandy.

The end.

 

[Silver Jelly]

I have a lot of eurocents lying around, and I always think of using them, but I'm afraid.

 

[Necronic]

Anyone else read this "Playing with Penises?"

 

[Shegokigo]

Nope.

 

[Necronic]

Too bad.

 

Nope.

 

[crono1224]

I read it as playing with pennies, but it was a lot more disappointing. I was a pizza delivery driver for a while and it annoyed me greatly when people would pay 3+ dollars in small coins. I think i delivered a 19$ order, got 5 dollars in paper, and 14$ in a bag of random coins. Wanna know why that pisses me off cause they could have easily shorted me a dollar or two, and no I don't have time to sit there and count it, if its a busy time I am lossing money on deliveries.

To why we still use pennies I am sure its easy enough to round, 1-2 goes to 0, 3-4 goes to 5. I mean lets be honest how many people bend over to pick up a penny.

 

[figmentPez]

Utah man tries to pay traffic fine with $82 in pennies.

"Court officials are apparently not amused, and have asked Petersen to come back in and offer a more "acceptable" form of payment. They say state policy allows clerks to reject unusual forms of payment, and it's going to waste county resources for someone to count all that change."

 

[JCM]

After it became popular here to pay stuff with coins in protest, most businesses have started posting clear limits of how much they'll accept.

 

[Shegokigo]

Utah man tries to pay traffic fine with $82 in pennies.

\"Court officials are apparently not amused, and have asked Petersen to come back in and offer a more \"acceptable\" form of payment. They say state policy allows clerks to reject unusual forms of payment, and it's going to waste county resources for someone to count all that change.\"

What part of "Private companies" and "state government" are different rules didn't you get?

 

[figmentPez]

What part of "Private companies" and "state government" are different rules didn't you get?

The part where there's some difference in the rules? The government can require reasonable payment, and private companies can require reasonable payment.

 

[Shegokigo]

Government agencies CANNOT refuse payment of any legal tender in the form of collection or debt.

Private companies CAN.

That's really not a hard concept to grasp.

 

[figmentPez]

Government agencies CANNOT refuse payment of any legal tender in the form of collection or debt.

That's exactly what happened in the news story I quoted. The court refused payment of a traffic fine because it was in all pennies. Loose pennies was considered an unusual method of payment and was an allowed refusal. (Another story I found apparently specifies that in Utah payment in pennies must be rolled, and then the rolls signed and labled with the case number.)

 

[HCGLNS]

Instead of pennies, both guys should have paid in Zachary Taylor dollars.