March 2, 2008 — Dear John: Back in November I used the Chase ATM located in the building where I work. I keyed in the amount of $110, but instead of getting that amount, the ATM spewed out the amount of $220 in twenty dollar bills.

But it only debited my account for $110. I walked to a nearby branch to report the incident in person and I re-deposited the extra $110 back into my account so when the error was found the money would be there and I could pay it back.

How much longer before I should just say that I’ve been blessed? Or will it be a matter of time before this is found and corrected? C.C.

Dear C.C.: You have been blessed - with a conscience and good sense.

This question does come up from time to time.

So I called Chase to ask them about accounting errors like this. And, as you probably realized, I changed the initials on this letter and obscured some details so you can keep your little secret if you’d like.

Here’s what probably happened.

Chase says all ATM machines count the number of bills dispensed but can’t keep track of the denominations. Very few of the machines handle $10 bills. Most just do $20s.

Since you wanted an amount divisible by 10, you got the smaller bills.

But the person who filled the machine probably put $20 bills in the slot by mistake. So you - and probably some other customers that day - made out like bandits.

Which gets me to the other point of this. The bank will probably never be able to figure out where the money went.

But if it does you would be in trouble.

You may feel better that you reported the ATM incident in person but did you receive any type of acknowledgment from the person at the bank?

Dom Amorosa, former federal prosecutor who is now in private practice, thinks you should protect yourself - and your reputation - by sending a letter or an e-mail to Chase.

!

Dear John: We have as much oil in the Rockies as some Mideast OPEC suppliers. We just don’t dig for it. Shouldn’t we stop buying oil from OPEC and stop supporting terrorists? E.D.

Dear E.D. Yep, we should drill for oil anywhere it exists in the US. We should do so very carefully to preserve our country’s beauty. But America isn’t going to look very beautiful if we don’t arrest our current economic distress - which is very much the result of our dependence on foreign oil and wars we fight to keep the goo flowing.

By the way, there have been reports that the oil deposits on government land in the Rockies exceed by many times the known reserves in Saudi Arabia.

Send your questions to Dear John, The N.Y. Post, 1211 Ave. of the Americas, N.Y., N.Y., 10036, or john.crudele@nypost.com.**

(05-17) 08:27 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) —

Paul Wolfowitz’s future as World Bank president rests with the 24 board members who are trying to resolve conflict-of-interest charges that have roiled the poverty-fighting institution.

The board was set to resume deliberations Thursday.

Wolfowitz and the Bush administration were seeking a face-saving deal with the board that would allow him to resign under his own terms and escape some blame for the furor involving his girlfriend’s compensation.

Pressure on Wolfowitz to step down has grown since Monday’s release of a bank panel report on his handling of the 2005 pay package of bank employee Shaha Riza.

Wolfowitz contends he acted in good faith.

European members Д led by France, Germany and the Netherlands Д are pushing for Wolfowitz to resign. The White House, for the first time, suggested this week that it would be open to a change of leadership.

“It’s a game that is still going on. What I understand from people close to the board is that they really want to make a decision on this case because it cannot continue like it is. It’s really bad for the bank,” said Kees-Jaap Ouwekerk, spokesman for Dutch Overseas Development Minister Bert Koenders.

Behind the scenes negotiations took place on Wednesday for an exit package for Wolfowitz, but they failed to produce a resolution. Wolfowitz and his attorney, Robert Bennett, has said repeatedly that Wolfowitz won’t resign with a cloud of what they believe are unfair charges hanging over him.

The 185-nation World Bank, created in 1945 to rebuild Europe after World War II, now provides more than $20 billion a year for projects such as building dams and roads, bolstering education and fighting disease. The bank’s centerpiece program today offers interest-free loans to the poorest countries.

By tradition, an American has run the bank, with the board’s approval. A European heads the bank’s sister agency, the International Monetary Fund.

The United States, the bank’s biggest financial contributor, wants to keep that decades-old tradition intact.

Riza worked for the bank before Wolfowitz took over as president in June 2005. She was moved to the State Department to avoid a conflict of interest, but stayed on the bank’s payroll.

Her salary went from close to $133,000 to $180,000. With subsequent raises, it eventually rose to $193,590.

The bank panel concluded that the salary increase Riza received “at Mr. Wolfowitz’s direction was in excess of the range” allowed under bank rules.

The panel said Wolfowitz “placed himself in a conflict of interest situation” when he became involved in the terms and details of Riza’s assignment and pay package and “he should have withdrawn from any decision-making in the matter.”

Meanwhile, the German Ministry of Finance said Thursday that Wolfowitz was still expected to attend a meeting of finance officials from the Group of Eight nations in Potsdam on Friday and Saturday, which is supposed to set the agenda for next month’s summit of G-8 leaders.

“We did not receive a cancellation,” spokesman Torsten Albig said.

There were concerns that the flap over Wolfowitz would overshadow talks on the global economy, which is the main focus on the group. Besides the United States, the countries that make up the G-8 are Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia.

___

AP Writers Mike Corder contributed to this report from the Netherlands and Matt Moore from Frankfurt.

___

On the Net:

World Bank:

http://www.worldbank.org/

March 2, 2008 — At a time when major airlines are charging $7,000 for first-class flights from New York to London, a pair of smaller carriers are betting they can fly high with prices one-fourth of what the majors charge.

SilverJet and Eos offer flights from New York-area airports to terminals outside London, and feature such posh amenities as menus designed by fine restaurants, suites with seats that can be fully horizontal and free showers once you arrive in the UK. The cost: around $1,800 round-trip.

But offering the biggest bang for the buck brings with it a lot of turbulence.

Both airlines offer just two flights a day to London, while the majors have as many as 10 daily flights.

SilverJet CEO Lawrence Hunt says that rising jet fuel costs have led to higher fares, but he said he expects SilverJet’s load factor should reach 70 percent in March. The airline needs an average of 65 percent of seats filled in order to break even.

But a larger issue for both SilverJet and EOS could be the track record of niche airlines - which is enough to make anyone airsick. Over the years, a number of start-up airlines have come and gone with plans for catering to high-end travelers, only to find themselves grounded by the realities of a very competitive marketplace.

The most recent casualty is MAXjet, which pitched itself as an airline offering business-class flights between the US and UK for a fraction of what the big guys charged. MAXjet shut down in December - due in part to fuel costs.