Many of you have disagreed with me, but I appreciate your responses. I would not have posted my proposed letter if I did not want advice. I will take the less aggressive route for now.

Some of you have fallen all over yourself saying what a fine response Dr. HFH has posted. Yet what he is saying is that no business traveler should ever have any right to legal compensation if they are reimbursed by their employer for their expenses. If we go that far, why not exclude independent contractors? All the law requires for compensation is duty or contract, breach of duty or contract and damage. Unrelated, but one need not even be a party to a contract to sue for the benefits of that contract if one is an intended third-party beneficiary of that contract. Also, I don't know where Dr. HFH dredged up the business about the longarm statute; I think I mentioned it in another post. But he is absolutely wrong about the law in that he has it exactly backwards. There always must be minimum contacts for there to be long arm jurisdiction.

Oh, and by the way, to explain the hassle of making a phone call. It's no big deal, but I had to pester my wife to do this. She can only access her credit card account with her laptop, and then only if she has her keyring with her. So it involved my running up and down three flights of 14-foot steps (twice, since I didn't bring the keyring) so she could get everything open before she or I made the phone call. Not the end of the world, but we shouldn't have had to call and we certainly shouldn't have had to call twice.

While I didn't find the good doctor's post helpful, if we all agreed we couldn't have horse racing. Thanks for your responses and I'll post how an email request goes.