Another CtCer hits the brick wall hard

Post by **Joey Smith** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:34 pm

Watching the CtCers is like watching birds hit the sliding glass door. The idiots just can't figure out that the CtC position is totally worthless.

TominCA

3 Posts
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 10:04:42 AM
------------------

I received a LTR 2801C from the IRS telling me they are going to inform my employer to begin withholding from my paycheck at the maximum rate. I’ve heard of this happening to others and need advise as to what can be done to dodge this bullet. This is disastrous, particularly since they are already garnishing my wages under a previous demand letter by the State. Please give me suggestions and your experience.

bla

1 Posts
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 10:24:41 AM
-----------------

Is this letter still signed by Steve Warner?

TominCA

3 Posts
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 10:28:32 AM
----------------

No. It's signed by Maureen A. Judge, Operations Manager, Collection

John J. Bulten

359 Posts
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 10:45:19 AM
----------------

Welcome, Tom! If you haven't filed, you can call the IRS and tell them that you're going to file for the affected years and you need a collection hold. Then find someone who knows CtC cold to help you ramp up quickly so you can make a nonfrivolous filing.

If you have filed and have not had a claim disallowed, you can request a collection hold either because they are still processing or because you need to answer their latest letter.

If you have been disallowed, you can request a collection hold so that you can appeal. In each case their desire to hold is related to how serious your collection activity is and how persuasive you sound about your return, response, or appeal being suitable.

But if you owe the tax, pay it of course!

Carl

210 Posts
Posted - 06/13/2007 : 2:02:24 PM
----------------

quote:
-----------------
Originally posted by John J. Bulten

Then find someone who knows CtC cold to help you ramp up quickly so you can make a nonfrivolous filing.

----------------

John, most of us have filed what we consider "nonfrivolous filings".
However, that is the only term (frivilous) that Parizek knows.

If there is a way to file, other than Pete's example which I used,
that will produce a nonfrivilous filing from Parsitezek, I'd sure like to see a sample of that one.

Post by **webhick** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:46 pm

If there is a way to file, other than Pete's example which I used,
that will produce a nonfrivilous filing from Parsitezek, I'd sure like to see a sample of that one.

He can try filing one with a non-frivolous position.

Cobalt Shiva · Post by **Cobalt Shiva** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:03 pm

Reminds me of the joke about how Pink Floyd and Dale Earnhardt are alike . . .

Doktor Avalanche · Post by **Doktor Avalanche** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:41 pm

Cobalt Shiva wrote:Reminds me of the joke about how Pink Floyd and Dale Earnhardt are alike . . .

I've never heard that one.

Post by **Demosthenes** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:48 pm

Their greatest hit was the Wall.

Post by **Quixote** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:19 pm

John J. Bulten

359 Posts
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 10:45:19 AM
----------------

Welcome, Tom! If you haven't filed, you can call the IRS and tell them that you're going to file for the affected years and you need a collection hold. Then find someone who knows CtC cold to help you ramp up quickly so you can make a nonfrivolous filing.

If you have filed and have not had a claim disallowed, you can request a collection hold either because they are still processing or because you need to answer their latest letter.

If you have been disallowed, you can request a collection hold so that you can appeal. In each case their desire to hold is related to how serious your collection activity is and how persuasive you sound about your return, response, or appeal being suitable.

But if you owe the tax, pay it of course!

I see Bulten has extended to LH his policy of responding to posts without reading them. Those of us who read Tom's post know that he did not mention an IRS collection problem. Of course, given JB's confusion concerning federal and state law, he might think the IRS can stop a state tax garnishment.

rachel · Post by **rachel** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:58 am

Quixote wrote:
John J. Bulten

359 Posts
Posted - 06/12/2007 : 10:45:19 AM
----------------

Welcome, Tom! If you haven't filed, you can call the IRS and tell them that you're going to file for the affected years and you need a collection hold. Then find someone who knows CtC cold to help you ramp up quickly so you can make a nonfrivolous filing.

If you have filed and have not had a claim disallowed, you can request a collection hold either because they are still processing or because you need to answer their latest letter.

If you have been disallowed, you can request a collection hold so that you can appeal. In each case their desire to hold is related to how serious your collection activity is and how persuasive you sound about your return, response, or appeal being suitable.

But if you owe the tax, pay it of course!

I see Bulten has extended to LH his policy of responding to posts without reading them. Those of us who read Tom's post know that he did not mention an IRS collection problem. Of course, given JB's confusion concerning federal and state law, he might think the IRS can stop a state tax garnishment.

I was told that John Bulton and Pete are the one in the same.

Nikki · Post by **Nikki** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:07 am

Whoever told you that was mistaken.

Pete lives in Michigan, John in Florida.

grammarian44 · Post by **grammarian44** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:08 am

I've wondered about that myself, but I bet 50 cents Demo is going to tell us in five minutes that they are not one and the same, because if they were, she would have said so already--many times.

If Pete and John are one and the same, then Pete's level of self-infatuation is extraordinary. Bulten so worships Pete it is almost disturbing.

Post by **webhick** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:08 am

rachel wrote:I was told that John Bulton and Pete are the one in the same.

You might want to take a look at a copy of John's 2005 tax return. Unless it's fake (which I doubt) or he's Pete assuming the name of another CtC filer, they're two different people.

Out of curiosity, where did you hear that they were one and the same?

Doktor Avalanche · Post by **Doktor Avalanche** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:36 am

Demosthenes wrote:Their greatest hit was the Wall.

Oh, that's just wrong...

Post by **wserra** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 9:49 am

grammarian44 wrote:Bulten so worships Pete it is almost disturbing.

Post by **Joey Smith** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:01 pm

wserra wrote:
grammarian44 wrote:Bulten so worships Pete it is almost disturbing.

The relationship reminds me of Steven Swan's relationship with Irwin Schiff. Swan worshipped Irwin and was one of his biggest defenders. Only after he was convicted and sentenced to a term about as long as Irwin's did Swan realize that he was simply another victim of Irwin's scam but by then it was too late.

Bulten will be the same; he'll be Pete's biggest supporter right up until the time that he's handcuffed and put away for a significant percentage of his remaining life. Only after some time alone and away from Pete might Bulten wake up and see that the mailbomber is just so much pure B.S.

Post by **The Observer** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:04 pm

Especially if Pete became a state witness against Mr. Bulten in order to get a lesser sentence.

Kimokeo · Post by **Kimokeo** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:15 pm

When the first $5,000 penalty strikes for frivolous fiiling, hopefully things will begin to change.

$500 didn't bite. $5,000 not only bites, it makes levies and liens.

John J. Bulten · Post by **John J. Bulten** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:27 pm

Excuse me if I've asked this before, but since I strive to obey all laws (with a rare exception for civil disobedience which I have not invoked), would anyone who is so interested in warning me against criminal behavior (ostensibly the purpose of this forum) please outline where my danger lies?

I do not advocate tax evasion, abusive tax shelters, perjury, failure to file, failure to withhold, unlicensed practice of law, or any crime.

Post by **The Observer** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:36 pm

It isn't a matter of what you purport to not "advocate." If it happens, you will be charged with any or all of the above crimes based on your actions, of what you did or did not do in terms of reporting and paying.

. · Post by . » Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:54 pm

would anyone who is so interested in warning me against criminal behavior (ostensibly the purpose of this forum) please outline where my danger lies?

Why would you be the least bit concerned about possible criminal behavior on your part?

You have all of the answers, don't you?

. · Post by . » Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:05 pm

warning me against criminal behavior (ostensibly the purpose of this forum)

TPs always seem to think that everything is all about them.

silversopp · Post by **silversopp** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:05 pm

Let's be realistic here a second.

John Bulten earns less than $10,000/yr and frequently bounces between temp agencies. He used Pete's method to get only a few hundred dollars back.

I think John is safe because the government would spend more money having one investigator work for a day than the amount they would get from prosecuting John.

Personally, I feel sorry for him. Someone who is that poor and uses CtC to get money to put food on the table isn't someone I'd like to see taken down.