Whee, a Lawsuit!

If I was the judge I'd throw the case as a waste of community resources (I think there's a thing called a nuisance lawsuit) and award costs against you. My advice is to take a deep breath, get a grip, pay the fine, donate any money you save by not going to court to a charity that provides holidays to poor kids dying of cancer, and then watch an episode of Judge Judy for your legal entertainment! It brings to mind the old saying "A person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client" (or something along those lines) ;)

ps. If you do lose the case (perhaps on a "technicality") are you likely to have to pay costs of the defendent? Any idea how much that might be?

Regards

http://enoughwealth.com

In Oregon there are two tiers for tax disputes, first the Magistrate Division and then the Regular Division. I expect that in this first round there wouldn't be a trial anyway; just a judge looking at my case.

The defendant is the Oregon Department of Revenue. Does the government ever get to collect its costs? And what of the literature stating I have the right to this appeal -- doesn't that mean they have to rule on the merits and can't just throw it out?

The ODOR ignored my second letter so this is my only recourse. It is unacceptable for government to behave in the manner it has. Someone has to put their foot down and say "no".

I felt like Allstate insurance was previously behaving in a totally unacceptable manner to me so I sued them. I was shocked to find out a couple years into the process that I shouldn't actually progress into a trial because of the risk involved in me possibly having to cover their costs! All sorts of little legal rules and trends exist to try to keep as many people as possible from reaching a judge. Here's another thing for you to consider: will you have to devote one or more years to this lawsuit? Will that be worth your time? I ended up settling in my case and not getting what I deserved when it was over and done (yes, Allstate had to pay out more than they originally offered but I ended up losing money on the whole thing because of legal fees). I agree with the other commenter that you might want to look into nuisance lawsuit policies... The court system isn't as fair as you would think (at least based on my experience), and I do believe a lot of it is because they are indeed being overloaded by an enormous number of cases.

Despite the good advice above that I really do respect, I'm filing anyway. If no one holds government accountable, their behavior will not improve. Call it civic spirit, or stubbornness, or whatever else comes to mind.

Since I'm also simultaneously paying what the ODOR claims is due (and attempting to recover some of it via the court) I believe I'll be able to back out at any time simply by dropping the case. So I think my risk is minimal.

For the curious, here is my argument:

When I filed my amended 2005 tax returns, I also paid the $90 due [Enclosure A]. Over a month later, Defendant refunded that $90 [Enclosure B] for reasons that it has not yet revealed. By the time I received the refund I no longer remembered whether I was expecting one and I simply deposited the check at my bank.

Eight and a half months after sending the refund, Defendant sent me a Notice of Deficiency [Enclosure C] seeking the $90, plus interest. I responded with a letter [Enclosure D] with proof of my original payment. (At this time I had long since forgotten receiving a refund.)

Defendant responded with a Notice of Liability Balance [Enclosure E] that included only two sentences of text not part of the form letter. Defendant stated that they both received my payment and issued a refund, but provided no evidence of the latter. I responded with another letter [Enclosure F] seeking such evidence, which under the confusing circumstances I considered a completely reasonable request.

Impatient for Defendant’s response, I independently investigated the refund. I contacted my bank to obtain copies of my deposits from the period of the claimed refund and found the $90 deposit. At this point it was clear to me that Defendant had indeed sent me a refund, but also that it was sent in error.

Defendant’s eventual response was a Notice of Deficiency Assessment [Enclosure G] which – disappointingly and unprofessionally – completely ignored my requests both for evidence and for explanation, while adding a penalty charge for my failure to pay a debt that Defendant had provided no evidence that I owed.

I believe strongly that the circumstances of this dispute deserve more than a mere two sentences of human involvement from the Defendant. They mistakenly issued a refund, took over eight months to realize it, would not substantiate their claims or admit their error, and penalized me for it – as if I, and not the Defendant, was responsible for the situation!

The amount of money involved in this case is unimportant. I am pursuing court action because it is clear to me that the Defendant’s processes are prone to confusing errors that its support personnel do not handle in a professional manner. In private industry a series of events like these could be a case study in customer-hostile system behavior, and would be used to improve the system. After seeing the Defendant’s disinterest in even acknowledging its problems, I fear that if I simply pay what is asked without getting the Court’s involvement, there would be no attempt to fix the system’s problems and that other taxpayers would be affected in the future.

Simultaneously with this filing I am also paying $100.04 to the Defendant, which includes all interest and penalties.

And here is the relief I'm seeking:

1. Written admission from the Defendant that the 07/05/06 refund was sent in error.

2. An explanation of why the 07/05/06 refund was sent to me.

3. Defendant’s agreement to examine and improve its processes so that a similar error does not occur in the future.

4. Defendant’s agreement that it should provide evidence to support its claims before assessing penalties.

5. Reimbursement of the $5.60 interest on the grounds that it accumulated due to the Defendant’s initial error and subsequent failure to notify me of the situation in a timely manner.

6. Reimbursement of the $4.44 penalty on the grounds that the Defendant never provided evidence that I actually owed the amount claimed.

7. Reimbursement of the $1.60 postage (two 39-cent and two 41-cent stamps) I’ve spent to mail my two letters to the Defendant, my payment to the Defendant, and the current documents to the Court, on the grounds that I incurred these costs as a result of the Defendant’s error.

8. Reimbursement of my $25 court filing fee on the grounds that it became necessary to file only because the Defendant ignored the reasonable requests in my second letter.

You give refineries the benefit of the doubt when they require maintenance. You won't give the ODOR the same? Doesn't every person/business/government-organization make mistakes?

Seems to me like the amount of personal attention you recevied (two sentences) is probably relative to the amount of money involved. If it were 10x, you'd probably get a bit more attention and maybe even an apology.

Please quit wasting my taxpayer dollars and find something more useful to do!

(I do not understand the connection between refinery maintenance and the present situation. Would you care to explain what the relevance is?)

Yes, every person and every organization makes mistakes. But why should people remain idle as mistakes occur? Shouldn't they instead take steps to avoid repeating the mistakes?

This isn't about the money. It's about a system that refuses to admit it's made a mistake, so it won't investigate the cause of the mistake, so it won't do anything to prevent the mistake from happening again.

Wouldn't you like government to make fewer mistakes?

"why should people remain idle as mistakes occur?"

Because correcting some mistakes is less efficient than allowing them to continue.