<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The check is not in the mail</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/</link>
	<description>Consumer advocate Christopher Elliott&#039;s site.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:25:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: alex</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/comment-page-1/#comment-9978</link>
		<dc:creator>alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:39:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/#comment-9978</guid>
		<description>Having worked at hotel front desks and as an income auditor (the person that deals with tax-exempt guests), it seems clear that the priest didn&#039;t follow the rules.  When guests arrive and claim to be exempt, they need to provide proof.  There are far too many scammers out there and just because someone is wearing priestly garb doesn&#039;t mean he&#039;s automatically tax-exempt.  

The hotel did the priest a favor by agreeing to take the tax off after the fact.  The priest needs to own up to his role in this problem.  He should have presented documentation upon arrival.  If this had happened, there wouldn&#039;t have been a problem.  That said, the Days Inn should never have double changed the priest in the end.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having worked at hotel front desks and as an income auditor (the person that deals with tax-exempt guests), it seems clear that the priest didn&#8217;t follow the rules.  When guests arrive and claim to be exempt, they need to provide proof.  There are far too many scammers out there and just because someone is wearing priestly garb doesn&#8217;t mean he&#8217;s automatically tax-exempt.  </p>
<p>The hotel did the priest a favor by agreeing to take the tax off after the fact.  The priest needs to own up to his role in this problem.  He should have presented documentation upon arrival.  If this had happened, there wouldn&#8217;t have been a problem.  That said, the Days Inn should never have double changed the priest in the end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/comment-page-1/#comment-8106</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:49:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/#comment-8106</guid>
		<description>Father William &lt;b&gt;Mary Morgenstern&lt;/b&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Father William <b>Mary Morgenstern</b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/comment-page-1/#comment-8049</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:54:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/the-check-is-not-in-the-mail/#comment-8049</guid>
		<description>Oops, fixing the problem by charging the customer instead of crediting him.  Nice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oops, fixing the problem by charging the customer instead of crediting him.  Nice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

