Dont quite understand the situation... # R3 T1 l6 D) [: K+ z) ~, w: [, } T
Ask LZ: - C6 P9 b( x% c7 R# n8 E
# T: K- k, _) A2 @7 V* n' l9 n1 mHow much is one pair of the shoes?8 O" y T8 t3 K1 i( B
) V9 l6 y/ D& ?( T8 k% [0 F
How much did you pay for that? one pair or two pairs? ! N* K8 o8 J- \7 x; J/ C9 T! j) X9 |& [2 |5 Z; o2 x2 @4 c4 _6 ^, Z
How much did you get covered from your husband's insurance company?" }& a q ` {: c0 O& ?0 r4 U
{ \: z5 w8 h% X% S
How much left you want your insurance company to cover ?& Y3 Z/ e F; k. ]
0 b; A* G6 E( Z/ k
Thanks
您真的看不懂吗,我义务帮您解读一下 ) n. T) ~: v. T! U* g " c( s3 u$ S {这个确实是个矛盾,你觉得你不会那样做拿到了保险公司的钱而不去做那些相应的福利--这个说的就是保险套现--拿着invoice找保险公司报销,不去做invoice上面的项目,比如鞋 ... ' ]) I. M: N" p5 L q2 Y- j) }wcjn 发表于 2011-9-12 20:54
3 `: F; m- d: O S$ D
" O: V7 J- |8 D' Y5 d* v
花了钱不买鞋,然后报销? 这是什么逻辑。。。绕不过来。 & d. }$ y0 m! j" `3 e7 a不过应该看来是商家和客户共同联手骗保险公司的钱吧? $ @! S+ I+ E- {- Q* f# c7 l8 ]) B! `太高深了。。。