IRS interception of tax refund

seeker · #1 04-20-2004, 03:12 PM

We need help!& And yes, I kow, we need to get the IRS out of the picture, but last year's withholdings were already gone and the 1040 was filed.&

The US Dept of Treasury, through the Office of the Attorney General in Hanatna, GU, have intercepted the refund& " .. as authorized by Federal law, we applied all or part of your Federal payment to a debt you owe."& Know the thing is, they have incorrect information and have ignored previous mailings regarding correction, even though it included validation through the Illinois dept of Child and Family Services.& The ex-wife, (yeah, another one!) had illegally removed two children to Guam without parental notification.& The arrears where from this period of time that the father was attempting to locate and communicate with his children.& They are now back in local area (for over two years) and communicating amiably, but Guam continues to intercept and hold all Federal and State refunds, etc.& Last year an EFT was done by them on 4/15 and the FRNs were in limbo until mid-September, when the ex-wife received a check.&

I have found several interesting CITES ( 26 U.S.C. 6402(c) and 42 U.S.C. 664)&and memos from the Office of Child Support Enforcement (Department of Treasury's notice of proposed rulemaking regarding the Federal Tax Refund offset program. It was published in the Federal Register, Volume 63, Number 149 on August 4, 1998. )& 

So, your input is requested as to the best way to proceed.& A VOD to all parties?& A CA with the VOD?& Commercial Lien? 

Thanks so mch for all the great support on this site.& It has been so educational and I am learning exponentially it seems.& Then something comes up that I have no clue about!& Am I on the right track here?& 

Thanks!

Seeker

Jerseee · #2 04-20-2004, 03:46 PM

Seeker,

I just left Guam in December (Yigo) and I believe is spelled Hagatna--anyway, it is going to be tough to get that back.& Also, you need to remember who has jurisdiction over Guam.& If you are in the mainland now, you may have to go to district court (California somewhere)&to challenge the lawfulness of the order.& I am going through the same thing and that is the route I am taking.& richard cornforth's material is priceless.

seeker · #3 04-20-2004, 04:00 PM

Thanks, Jerseee.& I guess our question continues to be "Why are they still involved?"& The ex left Guam over two years ago!& Yet they continue to incept, (how does it get there?) and they do nothing to update their information even when served with it.& Do you think a VOD to the Attorney General and the Offce of the Treasury would do any good?& WE have updated info, but they seem unable to find it.& Does this not constitute a breach of authority and compromise of character?& Being angry colors one's vision, so we much appreciate your feedback.

Which of Richard's material would be most pertinent?& I have been unable to follow the links supplied here.& Any suggestions?

Seeker

Jerseee · #4 04-20-2004, 04:42 PM

Seeker,

It is sad to say this but Guam is terribly run and it may never get any better.& Nepotism runs high there and I gathered an underlying disgust for people from the mainland.& Anyway, I know what you mean.& I am getting water bill notices from them and never applied for service.

Richard Cornforths video on law of voids is somewhere on the forum.& My computer lost NTLDR so I had to reformat my hard drive (didn't do backups regularly) so I lost the link.& But you may want to look into a writ of Mandamus and file it at the federal level on the child support order.& AS far as the bank is concerned, a nice letter to the FTC, Guam's chamber of commerce, the better business bureau, the DA's office&and the IRS would not be out of order.

Ice · #5 04-20-2004, 05:20 PM

Here's the link for the Cornforth videos...

http://www.kel.cc/downloads/TaxStuff...eos/index.html

Please note Jerseee's suggestion of a "nice letter".& That should be your first attempt with all parties.

Keep us updated on your progress.

&

seeker · #6 04-20-2004, 05:21 PM

Jerseee;

&

The more I look at this letter, the more I feel a "DUH?!" moment coming on .. the letterhead is from the US treasury collecting ON BEHALF of the attorney general of guam ---> hence, the monies/refund are on the mainland in the posession of the Treasury.& Would it be prudent to reply to them with a VOD request within the 72 hour time frame to put them on notice of a possible fraud within the AG office?& Wouldn't that be a valid claim if the debt has not been validated/updated in over TWO years?&

Appreciate your input.

&

Seekre

seeker · #7 04-20-2004, 05:27 PM

Thanks, Ice.& The files are too large to download on my feeble little dialup.& Will try to come up with an alternative!

As to a "nice letter" -- suggestions?& Not "listen you morons!... "& LOL& Okay, that's just my annoyance speaking@!

Actually, perhaps just a request to have the various parties validate the debt and the involvement of the various (Guam AG) parties may be in order?&

I'm learning, with your help and all the others on this forum.& What a great group of people!

Seeker

Ice · #8 04-20-2004, 05:48 PM

Absolutely!... you got the idea... request verification and proof of authority... "nicely".&

By now "request verification" and "proof of authority" should be well embedded in the minds of most members.

&

#9 04-20-2004, 07:39 PM

What they're doing is called "set-off."

Here in VA it requires the involvment of the Comptroller and a whole bunch of other a-holes....

Randy

Jerseee · #10 04-20-2004, 10:15 PM

Seeker,

This is not advice okay.

What I did (and got positive results) was I did a "nice letter" and told a government agency of my position. It was child support enforcement concocting a debt that had been satisfied.

I simply wrote a letter and courtesy copied similar agencies like I told you before. In that letter, I stated my position and had case law support it. Furthermore, I demanded certified verification according to the code (which I cited in the letter also) and when I courtesy copied other organizations such as a senator, better business bureau, CRAs, and the ACLU...other people started to ask the same question I was asking, "where is the certified verification?"

That prompted their legal department to respond to me (without verification of course). Now my method and strategy can only work if they are greedy, arrogant and sure that they are above the law. Now the key that got my results was this.........

It was my exemption. that's right. HJR 192.

You see, in my first response to their demand for payment. I demanded certified verification and I tendered a CPN at the same time. I made sure that in my letter, I stated that "enclosed is a good faith payment for the entire amount in question. If your organization cannot verify the debt--please return my payment." Now in the letter I do not say that it is a CPN or BOE--I just state payment.

Now, if they send back the payment. then there is no debt. If they keep the payment, then the debt is satisfied. If they keep the payment and send a letter refusing my payment and demanding another. I make copies of that letter and do the process again. I send another "good faith payment" and mention the total that I have paid so far. I send this letter to them registered or certified and I send copies out to senators, IRS, Consumer Watch Groups and so on.

When they read the information--they will see that I have paid twice, and that child support is refusing payments and not returning the refused payments. So they are keeping the first payment and demanding another and not updating any account information. Do you see the power of acceptance now?

Never ever leave yor remedy and never argue.

My method gets them to leave you alone since it is not just you asking questions about their business practices. Public agencies are asking questions as well. hahahahaaaaa

what do you think?