The MDEQ recently announced that for fiscal year 2009 Michigan residents and businesses decreased their total solid waste volume by 13%. Waste imported from other states and Canada also reportedly decreased by roughly 24%. Good news to the extent that this significant reduction is attributable to an increased focus on sustainability. Every silver lining has a host rain cloud though, and the MDEQ was quick to point out that the $0.21 per ton fee on solid waste disposed in Michigan landfills is what funds its solid waste program and the continued decline in solid waste disposal means there are fewer dollars to fund that program. The MDEQ stated that this has “serious implications for Michigan’s ability to continue the current level of permitting, inspections and oversight of solid waste management in the state.” The press release went on to say that Michigan’s disposal fee is the lowest in the Great Lakes region. Translation: you can expect that the MDEQ will be asking for a fee increase.
This past year our client, the City of Westland, joined the effort to reduce solid waste disposal volumes. During the summer of 2009 the City implemented a curbside recycling program for all residential units, and as a result has seen its landfill waste drop by about 25% in the last quarter of 2009. The City is starting to see both cost savings and new revenues, and Mayor William Wild is thrilled with the outcome of the program to date. Our firm had the privilege of negotiating the contracts with each of the recycling program vendors.
If you have environmental questions, feel free to contact Andrea Montbriand at andrea@fb-firm.com.
Experienced and practical Michigan attorneys solving the problems of business owners, their families, and veterans... one case at a time.
Showing posts with label Andrea Montbriand. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Andrea Montbriand. Show all posts
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Final Payment Checks - Watch Out
Have you had a customer dispute an invoice and then tender a check with the words "final payment" or "payment in full" written conspicuously on the check or writes a letter stating same?
In 2006, Michigan adopted most of the Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC"), Article III of which deals with negotiable instruments - most commonly checks. Section 3311 in particular addresses the above situation. That provision states that a debtor who proves that: (1) he, in good faith, tendered payment as full satisfaction of a claim; (2) the claim was subject to a bona fide dispute; and (3) the creditor obtained payment (i.e., cashed the check), the creditor's claim is discharged if the check or a written document sent with the check contained a "conspicuous statement" that the check was intended as payment in full. Even if the notation was not present, if a creditor knows that the check was presented as payment in full, the claim will still be discharged. The payment tendered as payment in full, and the subsequent acceptance by the creditor (by cashing the check, etc.) constitutes an accord and satisfaction, an affirmative defense to a subsequent collections suit.
Michigan case law supports the idea of such a final payment check. Many factors can negate the required good faith element and each case is specific, however, it is important to acknowledge instruments that are received with the notation "payment in full" or "final payment" and handle them appropriately.
Andrea Montbriand at amontbriand@fb-firm.com.
In 2006, Michigan adopted most of the Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC"), Article III of which deals with negotiable instruments - most commonly checks. Section 3311 in particular addresses the above situation. That provision states that a debtor who proves that: (1) he, in good faith, tendered payment as full satisfaction of a claim; (2) the claim was subject to a bona fide dispute; and (3) the creditor obtained payment (i.e., cashed the check), the creditor's claim is discharged if the check or a written document sent with the check contained a "conspicuous statement" that the check was intended as payment in full. Even if the notation was not present, if a creditor knows that the check was presented as payment in full, the claim will still be discharged. The payment tendered as payment in full, and the subsequent acceptance by the creditor (by cashing the check, etc.) constitutes an accord and satisfaction, an affirmative defense to a subsequent collections suit.
Michigan case law supports the idea of such a final payment check. Many factors can negate the required good faith element and each case is specific, however, it is important to acknowledge instruments that are received with the notation "payment in full" or "final payment" and handle them appropriately.
Andrea Montbriand at amontbriand@fb-firm.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)