Authority Tax Services

On April 20, 2013, Mrand Mrs*** *** **., (hereinafter, the “Plaintiff”) entered into a legally binding contract w/ Authority Tax Services
(hereinafter, the “Defendant”) for Federal tax work. The scope of the contracted work, specifically, involved assisting the Plaintiff with a Federal Tax deficiency of approximately $34,000.00--- related to Federal filings from through 2012. The Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendant $2,for its assistance in creating a reasonable resolution to this problemAdditionally, a legally binding Form (Power of Attorney & Declaration of Representative), along w/ Form (Tax Information Authorization) was executed by the Plaintiff to facilitate the agreed-upon service contract. The Plaintiff then paid in-full (via installment payments) for all services contracted for, with the Defendant, according to an agreed upon payment plan
From May of till early December of 2013, the Defendant’s firm worked on and serviced the Plaintiffs’ file, to include the required Compliance call with the IRS, as well as reviewing the supplied Client information questionnaire and other financial documents (prepared by the Plaintiff and containing the Plaintiff’s actual accounting of monthly bills, earned income, investments, assets and present liquidity) for negotiation purposes. These numbers were imputed into a proper Form for evaluation and eventual IRS submission, when deemed relevant to a reasonable resolution.
Simultaneous to these actions, the Plaintiff was kept in constant phone and email contact, related to case progression and the need for required IRS documentationIn the latter point, the Plaintiff was less than cooperative and the Defendant had to re-request needed info on several occasions. Additionally, on several occasions, the tax professional was unable to contact the Plaintiff--- having to re-call additional times since a callback was, at times, not forthcoming. Additionally, the Defendant’s tax professional had to re-request (several times) that the Plaintiff supply all the information required by the IRS. As a Consequence, this caused undue delay in fashioning a reasonable tax resolution for the Plaintiff and, arguably, the Plaintiff Breached his Contract with the Defendant for failure to provide timely information, when requested. On top of this, the Plaintiff made contact with the IRS (while the Defendant was operating on a legally-binding Power of Attorney), which further complicated our resolution strategy for the Defendant
Regardless, the Defendant diligently worked with the IRS to fashion a reasonable resolution for the Plaintiff’s $34,tax deficiency; an Installment Agreement payment plan that allowed the Plaintiff a workable solution. Additionally, the Defendant was instrumental in removing a bank levy, on the Plaintiff’s account, which effectively removed a HUGE financial hardship on the Plaintiff, per the Service Agreement. Unfortunately, the Plaintiff refuses to recognize these achievements and has since filed a Complaint with the Revdex.com in seeking review of this matter
In reference to the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant was unprofessional or inattentive to their needs, during our eight month business engagement, the record is devoid of any evidence that substantiates this allegationIn fact, the record shows multiple calls and emails between the Plaintiff and Defendant while working the file; all transpiring weeks and months before the filing of this Complaint. Several of these emails demonstrate repeated requests--- by the Defendant to the Plaintiff---- for needed information or responses to IRS questions. Additionally, the Plaintiff’s repeated omissions of key information on fact-gathering forms added to the delay And finally, the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant left the Plaintiff without a reasonable resolution to their problem is, simply, factually incorrect and does not merit a response
Respectfully,
*** ** *** Compliance and Customer Service
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES
Irvine Center Dr., Ste
Irvine, CA

May
01, 2014">
FROM: *** ** ***, Compliance
Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
Irvine Center Dr., Ste
Irvine, CA
RE: *** *** *** _***
RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT:
On May 06, 2013, the Plaintiff-Client contracted
with the Defendant-Business, seeking tax preparation work for tax year 2012,
State and Federal. In exchange for services rendered (per the
negotiated Contract), the Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendant $via
monthly installments A payment plan was then approved by the Plaintiff,
made part of the Contract--- with payment tendered to Defendant to start
work.
The Defendant promptly mailed a Welcome Packet
to the Plaintiff, which provided all needed financial forms and necessary
Tax Organizer (TO) --- to include directions for completing the form--- the
answers, to which, to be imputed into the State and Federal tax filings for
2012. Lastly, a legally binding Form (Tax Information
Authorization) was executed by the Plaintiff to facilitate the agreed-upon
Defendant services.
Per the Agreement, Defendant duties were limited
to: (1) tax preparation work for tax year 2012, State and Federal. Unfortunately, the Defendant was precluded
from fully performing as the Plaintiff failed to provide the needed financial
information (i.e., the TO for 2012), required to file the Plaintiff’s
taxes. As a consequence, the Plaintiff
Breached his Contract with the Defendant by failing to provide (in a timely
manner) all requested documentation for services rendered, per the
Agreement. The Plaintiff’s failure to
return the TO’s was emblematic of Breach Therefore, the Plaintiff’s request for refund
is both unjustified and unwarranted by the Defendant. Regardless,
the Plaintiff has since filed Complaint with your office--- the point of this
response.
In reference to the Plaintiff’s alleged, general claim that the
Defendant acted unprofessionally and/or was in-attentive to the Plaintiff’s
needs, per the Agreement, our records are devoid of any such evidence. In
fact, the record shows that the Defendant comported itself professionally at
all times and was precluded from fully performing the Agreement due to the
Plaintiff’s inaction and Breach of Contract
Conversely, the Plaintiff maligned the Defendant, when the
Plaintiff falsely accused the Defendant of not fulfilling its’
Contract--- based on nothing more than rote speculation. Additionally, the Plaintiff simultaneously
defaulted on a prior IA with the Taxing Agency (which the Plaintiff had set up
earlier, prior to Contracting with the Defendant); thus, further
complicating the Defendant’s ability to assist the Plaintiff with his resolution
needs (i.e., tax preparation and compliance).
Again, the Defendant played no role in this additional distraction and
delay--- all Plaintiff induced
Therefore, the Revdex.com should view the
Plaintiff-Client’s filed Complaint with great skepticism, based on the facts,
and find on behalf of the Defendant-Business
Respectfully,
-*** ** ***, Compliance Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC

March
28,
0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0in;">
FROM: *** ** ***, Compliance
Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
Irvine Center Dr., Ste
Irvine, CA
RE: *** *** ***
RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT:
On February 9, 2013, the Plaintiff-Client
contacted the Defendant-Business, seeking tax assistance for a total Federal and
State deficiency of approximately $18,000.00. In exchange for
services rendered (per the negotiated Contract), the Plaintiff agreed to pay
the Defendant $3,via monthly installments A payment plan was then
approved by the Plaintiff, made part of the Contract--- with payment tendered
to Defendant to start work.
The Defendant promptly mailed a Welcome Packet
to the Plaintiff, which provided all needed financial forms, Tax Organizers
(TO’s) and directions for completing the required Client questionnaire--- the
answers, to which, to be imputed into an IRS Form 433-A (OIC) for resolution
purposes. Lastly, a legally binding Form (Power of Attorney
& Declaration of Representative), along w/ Form (Tax Information
Authorization) was executed by the Plaintiff to facilitate the agreed-upon
Defendant services.
Per the Agreement, Defendant duties were limited
to: (1) complete a required Compliance call(s) to the relevant Taxing
Agency(s); (2) fully review and analyze the Plaintiff’s financials/supporting
documents; and then (3) impute the verified information into an IRS Form 433---
required to negotiate ANY potential resolution with the
IRS (e.g., Offer in Compromise [OIC], Installment Agreement
[IA], Penalty Abatement [PA]). All actions were successfully
completed by the Defendant, per the Contract. In fact, an IA was
established, per the Contract, and the Plaintiff received a monthly installment
payment (to the IRS) for $50.00.--- based on an IRS assessment that the
Plaintiff possessed the means to pay his tax deficiency. The payment would eventually increase (and stabilize) at
$232.00/month in a six (6) month period (i.e., a $increase/month).
Regardless of the
successful outcome, the Plaintiff became upset and blamed the Defendant. The Defendant responded by asking for updated
financials from the Plaintiff--- showing that the originally submitted financial documentation (by
the Plaintiff to the Defendant) was somehow wrong, while supplying the new numbers. The Plaintiff never responded Soon
thereafter, the Plaintiff contacted the IRS himself and attempted to negotiate an
independent resolution--- w/out the Defendant's notice/direction, and in direct violation of the signed Agreement The
Plaintiff then filed Complaint with your office--- the point of this
response.
In reference to the Plaintiff’s alleged, general claim that the
Defendant acted unprofessionally and/or was in-attentive to the Plaintiff’s
needs, per the Agreement, our records are devoid of any such evidence. In
fact, the record shows that the Defendant comported itself professionally at
all times and fully complied with the four corners of the binding Agreement
All Compliance calls were made by the Defendant, per the Agreement; all
financials were reviewed, analyzed, compiled and then accurately documented in
a 433-D as well, per the Agreement Unfortunately, the Plaintiff failed to supply
any supporting documentation, showing that the Plaintiff was owed a lower IA
payment. Consequently, the Defendant was precluded from reviewing the matter further with the IRS
Additionally, the Plaintiff maligned the Defendant, when the
Plaintiff falsely accused the Defendant of not fulfilling its’
Contract--- based on nothing more than rote speculation. The Plaintiff
was also less than cooperative in supplying corrective, supporting paperwork,
which allegedly shows the Defendant’s mistake.
Lastly, the Plaintiff expressly Breached his Contract, with the
Defendant, when he spoke directly to the Taxing Agency without the Defendant’s
knowledge or direction to do so
Therefore, the Revdex.com should view the Plaintiff-Client’s fraud claim
(i.e., the filed Complaint) with great skepticism, based on the facts, and find
on behalf of the Defendant-Business
Respectfully,
-*** ** ***, Compliance Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC

April
7,
FROM: *** ** ***, Compliance
Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
Irvine Center Dr., Ste
Irvine, CA
RE: *** ***_ ***
To the Bureau,
The Defendant-Business holds firm behind its
prior Response to Complaint, having fully performed the Contract and wholly
disputing the continuing, unsubstantiated claims of the Plaintiff
Thank you
Respectfully,
-*** ** ***, Compliance Director,
AUTHORITY TAX
SERVICES, LLC

March 25,
"margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0in;">
FROM: *** ** ***, Compliance Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
Irvine Center Dr., Ste
Irvine, CA
RE: *** ***_***
RESPONSE TO
COMPLAINT:
On February 26, 2013, the
Plaintiff-Client contacted the Defendant-Business, seeking tax assistance for a
Federal deficiency of approximately $10,300.00. In exchange for services rendered (per the
negotiated Contract), the Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendant $2,via
monthly installments A payment plan was then
executed by the Plaintiff, made part of the Contract, and an initial payment was
made to start work..
The Defendant promptly mailed a Welcome Packet
to the Plaintiff, which provided all needed financial forms, Tax Organizers
(TO’s) and directions for completing the required Client questionnaire--- the
answers, to which, to be imputed into an IRS Form 433-A (OIC) for resolution
purposes. Lastly, a legally binding Form (Power of Attorney
& Declaration of Representative), along w/ Form (Tax Information
Authorization) was executed by the Plaintiff to facilitate the agreed-upon
Defendant services.
Per the Agreement,
Defendant duties were limited to: (1) complete a required Compliance call(s) to
the Taxing Agency(s); (2) fully review and analyze the Plaintiff’s financials/supporting
documents; and then (3) impute the verified information into an IRS Form 433---
required to negotiate ANY potential resolution with the IRS (e.g.,
Offer in Compromise [OIC], Installment Agreement [IA], Penalty Abatement [PA])
All actions were successfully completed
by the Defendant, per the Contract. However, when a reasonable CNC status (i.e., Currently Non-Collectible) was established on the Plaintiff's behalf, the Plaintiff insisted on an OIC resolution When the Defendant explained that the CNC status would accomplish all Plaintiff goals (e.g., related to no further IA payments being required by the Plaintiff, under the present, financial circumstance; all additional lien threats were removed; all threats of wage garnishment were removed; all threats of account levying were removed; lastly, Plaintiff brought to full compliance with the IRS, etc.), the Plaintiff became disgruntled--- insisting on an OIC resolution Unfortunately, the Plaintiff's combined assets, along with the Fair Market Value of owned real estate property, precluded such a resolution by the IRS A Termination letter, announcing the resolution and completed Contract, was sent to the Plaintiff Regardless, the Plaintiff filed Complaint with your office--- the point of this response.
In reference to the Plaintiff’s alleged,
general claim that the Defendant acted unprofessionally and/or was in-attentive
to the Plaintiff’s needs, per the Agreement, our records are devoid of any such
evidence. In fact, the record shows that
the Defendant comported itself professionally at all times and fully complied
with the four corners of the binding Agreement.
Conversely, the Plaintiff maligned the Defendant, when
the Plaintiff falsely accused the Defendant of not fulfilling it's Contract--- based on nothing more than rote speculation.
Therefore, the Revdex.com should view the
Plaintiff-Client’s fraud claim (i.e., the filed Complaint) with great
skepticism, based on the facts, and find on behalf of the Defendant-Business
Respectfully,
-*** ** ***, Compliance Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC

To the Bureau,
"white-space: pre;"> On January 15, 2013, Ms[redacted] (hereinafter, the "Plaintiff") entered into a legally binding Contract with
Authority Tax Services, LLC(hereinafter, the "Defendant"), to assist with the
Plaintiff's Federal tax deficiency of approximately $35,000.00. In exchange for the Defendant's help in
seeking a reasonable tax resolution and a garnishment reduction, the Plaintiff
paid $3,for services rendered
Additionally,
a legally binding Form (Power of Attorney & Declaration of Representative),
along w/ Form (Tax Information Authorization) was executed by the
Plaintiff to facilitate the agreed-upon service contract. The Plaintiff was promptly mailed a Welcome
Packet, by the Defendant, which provided all needed financial forms and
directions for completing the required Client questionnaire--- the answers, of
which, to be imputed into an IRS Form 433-A (OIC) During the next few months, multiple emails and
phone calls were exchanged between the parties and all contracted work (not stymied
by Plaintiff actions of Breach) was completed, per Contract. Regardless, the Plaintiff filed an official
Complaint with the relevant Revdex.com, complaining of a lack of
services rendered. The following
examples discredit this allegation by the Plaintiff
Example:
On 7/30/13, the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) was contacted, by the Defendant,
in an effort to adjust an excessive FTB garnishment of the Plaintiff's account,
while creating a reduced payment--- both reasonable and appropriate for the
Plaintiff. In this effort, the Defendant
(on 7/10/13) was able to negotiate a reduced garnishment payment---- from approximately
$2,250.00/month to a reasonable $800/month
Example: On 7/31/13, when the Plaintiff called the
Defendant to inform that the FTB was, in fact, taking $from each check
(total payment of $1,600.00/month), the Defendant immediately stepped-in. On
8/01/13, the appropriate FTB authorities were contacted and alerted of their
mistake, by the Defendant. The Defendant
further discovered that the FTB had failed to effectively notify the employer that
a garnishment reduction had previously been negotiated for the Plaintiff,
reducing his monthly garnishment.
Consequently, the Defendant was able to effectuate the correction for
the Plaintiff
Lastly,
example: On 8/20/13, the Defendant
called the Plaintiff to obtain the needed information for constructing an Offer
in Compromise (OIC) with the IRS. The
Defendant explained the negotiated fees (with the IRS) for the OIC
implementation, and informed the Plaintiff of the page financial package
created for the taxing authority, in fashioning out proposal per the
Contract. However, the Plaintiff
informed the Defendant that he had begun his own negotiations with the FTB/IRS
since that time (in direct violation of the Contract) because the Plaintiff
believed that the garnishment reduction should have been "more."
In
reference to the Plaintiff's Complaint that the Defendant had somehow failed to
provide its' contracted for services, the record is devoid of any evidence of
this claim. In fact, the record is
replete with required Defendant actions, constant communications with the
taxing agencies and Plaintiff, and shows a substantial effort to negotiate a
reasonable OIC on the Plaintiff's behalf Unfortunately, the Plaintiff Breached his
Contract with the Defendant, when the former failed to timely respond to our
requests for additional, financial information, needed by the IRS for
completion of Contract services and spoke directly to the agencies; thus, scuttling the Defendant's efforts at a
reasonable tax resolution. As a
consequence, the Defendant was precluded from completing its' work.
Therefore, the Bureau
should view this unsubstantiated allegation with great skepticism, and deny its
validity, while siding with the Defendant Business Thank you
With Great Respect,
-[redacted], Compliance Director
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
Irvine Center
Dr., Ste
Irvine, CA

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Regards,
you know I am a member of the Revdex.com ten my company name is [redacted] I ve been a member for a long time I can not believe that Revdex.com stands be hind this company they did take my money and iwould like a refund 
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I am not nor have I ever been a disgruntled client. Authority Tax Service (ATS) said the IRS had approved me for CNC status.  CNC status will no longer have me obligated to make IA payments, and no additional lien threats or garnishments would be brought against me; yet I have never seen documentation from ATS or the IRS stating this fact. I would think something of this nature would require legal documentation sent to the client stating that this status has taken place. I have asked ATS on several occasions to send me documentation of this agreement and as of this date I have yet to receive. I have been paying the IRS under the IA since before acquiring ATS and as of this date, 3/30/14 continue to receive payment statement from the IRS requiring me to make payments and been making payments to the IRS. If an agreement was established between IRS and ATS why am I still receiving these? I cannot in all good conscience stop paying the IRS without some type of legal documentation stating that I have the legal authorization to do so. My problem with ATS is I don't believe the CNC status agreement with the IRS was ever made. Again, if so, why not send me the documentation so I may cover myself if ever called upon by the IRS. In all honesty I don't believe ATS is being totally truthful on having done the work they say was done on my behalf and on this I am disgruntled. As I said once before, the only correspondence I have received from ATS (which I have attached) is a letter stating what they had supposedly done and that my case was now closed. What I want from them is proof stating that I am now in CNC status (again so I may cover myself should a issue ever arise with the IRS).
Please note: The attached closing letter was sent to me on Dec. 10, 2013 via email by [redacted], one of ATS agents. I often wonder why the CNC status agreement could not be emailed to me at the same time. (?) Please also note: At the heading, the attached letter was to be sent to me via U.S. Mail, again, I never received.
Regards,
[redacted]

May 14, 2014
font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; color: black;">
FROM:    AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
                7535 Irvine Center Dr., Ste. 200
                Irvine, CA  92618
RE:  [redacted] A. [redacted] _[redacted]
RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT:
 
  To the Bureau:
   Be advised that the Plaintiff, now alleging "fraud" against the Defendant-Business, was REFUNDED $2000.00 on March 31, 2014.  More importantly, the Plaintiff signed a Mutual Release, prior, in exchange for legal Consideration NOT TO FILE COMPLAINT WITH ANY ENTITY, RELATED TO THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT AND THE SIGNED LEGAL DOCUMENT.  (Please see the attached Exhibits--- Signed Mutual Release and supporting financial documentation of REFUND.  Thank you.)
   Ergo, the Plaintiff has arguably committed civil Fraud, against the Defendant, by filing a false, frivolous, and defamatory Complaint, and has additionally used the "good offices of the Revdex.com" as a conduit for committing this offense.   As a consequence, the Defendant-Business is actively reviewing its options, related to the Plaintiff's documented defamation and signed Release of Liability.  As a consequence and courtesy to your Organization, ATS would respectfully encourage the Revdex.com to act quickly, in its' own interests, by squelching this falsehood against the Defendant-Business and immediately dropping the matter from ANY further review--- posthaste.
   Thank you.
 
                       Respectfully,
                                 -AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I reject the rationale of the business entity, I have no  signed contract.  I have produced evidence of materials submitted to me by them for my echo  signature,  e-mail communication and other communique on  their letterhead, IRS have Authority Tax Service listed as my  authorized Representative; however, they state I am not a client (ignorance).  I'm not going back and forth, please keep my complaint on file as a warning to other individuals, Authority Tax Service is a FRAUD.    
 My only question to Authority  Tax Service, if I wasn't not  a client what was the $2,200 payment for?  Refund the funds withdrawn from my account and release my IRS form 2848 that was I echo signed. Send me a copy of the echo sign form that I  was suppose to receive. in PDF of signed records. 
 Hence, my complaint remains as factual.  Again, the company is fraudulent.  Why would I echo sign a form, send you a financial questionnaires  and authorize W/D of funds.    I hope this company is  investigated and shut down.   If a class action law suit is ever file, please count me in the loop. 
I fully understand, Revdex.com  has no legal arm; however, please let me complaint stand.  I have contacted, other government entities regarding ATS with legal authority.   I'm sure I'm not the only individual shafted by them
 
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I am in total awe as I read the false information provided to you from ATS. In regards to the requested Information Packet, the packet was completed over the phone with [redacted] because their (ATS) fax lines were not working on the date I tried faxing them over ( I have proof of the back and forth emails ). It appears that someone from their legal team responded to my claim with the intention on trying to cover up for their mishaps.I have NEVER relaxed/ delayed on sending them any information. The only document that was not sent to them was my 2003 W-2's. I explained the my 2003 employer was no longer in business and requested that they proceed with the information provided to them. Furthermore, I have NOT received any notices in the mail from ATS regarding a suspension of services in fact [redacted] contacted their financial office to delay my payments due to the fault if ATS. 
On May 27, 2014 I called to speak to [redacted] Coates ( the last person to contact me by vm and email)who was not available. I was transferred over to a "case manager" named "[redacted]" . [redacted] advised that [redacted] was waiting on the financial history & W-2's 
. I advised [redacted] that ATS has all of the requested I formation except the W-2 for 2003. I I formed her that the reason for my call is that [redacted] left me a vm 2 weeks prior informing me that she'd forwarded the documents to the State and was to be given a response/ resolution in 4 business days. Again, it has been 2 full weeks and I have not received any phone calls and or emails since then. [redacted], told me she was going to look at [redacted]'s files and email and call me back by the end of business day. Well, guess what? As usual I did not get a follow up call.
In my defense. At this point I feel U have the information for a solid legal case against ATS.
Reading the false response lets me k ow that they have no intentions on getting the issue at hand resolved.
 
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Again, the response was partially inaccurate. I will seek legal counsel. Thank you

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
What is stated in the response letter is incorrect. The proof of my complaints are the fact that my bank accounts were levied and seized due to Authority Tax negligence of my case. My OIC was never filed, as a result my case went past the due date, which Authority Tax was aware of. This is their fault not mine. Yes, I did take this matter into my own hands, but only after my bank accounts were levied, after which the BOE kept calling me. If Authority Tax was acting in the proper "signed power of attorney" why then was the BOE not notified? Why was I getting these calls and bills? Any reasonable and intelligent person would act exactly the same way given the same set of circumstances.
 
I was never told that my case "could take up to 90 days. How long Authority Tax states on the documentation does not matter. If the BOE gives you a due date, you must comply by this date. A credible attorney or tax firm will know this and provide the necessary information on time. What matters is not Authority Tax time table, but the BOE time table. Authority Tax is making a stupid excuse. And, why was my case given 3 different case managers in a month and a half?
 
It is interesting to me that I finally get a professional response, something I was refused during my entire process with them. I will remind you that , all of my calls just before the levy and right after were treated as unimportant. I was told repeatedly that the office was too busy to take my calls and someone will return my calls, this never happened. Again the proof of this is your own phone records, you need to go back and listen to the recordings.
 
The OIC amount of $5,000.00 I insisted on this amount, not Authority Tax. This amount has not been approved. Authority Tax is making it seem that they saved me 85% of the original billing. This simply is not true.
 
Yes, documents were drawn and signed, but Authority Tax breached their contract to me by making my situation worse not better. I hired them because they assured me they would, (not could) improve my situation. Part of their marketing strategy is Integrity, Due Diligence, this is just not the case. Why on earth would anyone hire a firm like this to make things worse??? 
 
In closing, Authority Tax can hide behind legal mumbo jumbo rhetoric all they want. But the fact still remains that I the customer am extremely dissatisfied, angry and disappointed. Doesn't this amount to anything??? Doesn't this matter? It should. Again, I urge anyone to take a look at their reviews on Revdex.com, Yelp, Google, all very negative. This should matter to Authority Tax. Integrity and honesty, doing what is promised, being a company of your word should matter. Customer satisfaction should matter. And if the ball is dropped then fix it, don't run and hide behind legal rhetoric like cowards! 
 
What is right is not always what is or is not legal, but what is ethically and morally correct. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Client hired us to handle IRS matter, but was unwilling to fill out the forms and documents necessary for us to financially continue moving his case forward past the initial stages. Customer is not correct in stating that we told him to contact the IRS regarding his resolution. He understands that...

he violated his contract with us by doing so. Client only paid 50% of his fees and his agreement was terminated for cause. There is no refund due this client. Thank you

April
7, 2014
 
FROM:   [redacted] B. [redacted], Compliance
Director
              
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
              
7535 Irvine Center Dr., Ste. 200
              
Irvine, CA  92618
To the Bureau,
  The Defendant-Business holds firm behind its
prior Response to Complaint, having fully performed the Contract and wholly
disputing the continuing, unsubstantiated claims of the Plaintiff.
   Thank you.
                            Respectfully,
                               -[redacted] B.
[redacted], Compliance Director,
                                 AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
The tax preparer we went to after receiving returns from ATS is a very reputable company. They were in no way aggressive with their numbers. I gave them the same paperwork I gave to ATS. A trucking owner/operator can write off ALL diesel expenses (which is paid for out of pocket by ME), maintenance and repairs along with any other expenses (also paid out of pocket by ME) pertaining to the business. I sent every single receipt to ATS for verification...whether they chose to add them up was at their discretion. The bankruptcy was a choice made after seeing the taxes owed and a few other bad decisions in 2007. At the time the bankruptcy was filed, ATS has submitted an Offer in compromise to IRS but stated it would not be reviewed for several months by the IRS and they may not even accept the proposal. This has nothing to do with the prepared returns having to be amended at the cost of another almost $1,000.00. The returns prepared by ATS actually halted the bankruptcy because the amount owed to IRS was greater than anything I could ever pay back in 5 years.  ATS was hired to prepare 2006 through 2012 business and personal taxes. In November we received the prepared returns for only personal. They claimed that was all I wanted done even though we had been speaking for months about the business expenses and I even filled out business tax organizers for each year in MARCH of last year. I was told if I wanted the business done too it would be an additional $2,000.00. At this point we had been with ATS for 10 months with phone calls, faxes and emails exchanged two - three times a month. Business and personal are not prepared separately, they are prepared as ONE return! I am attaching 2011 amended return done by the new tax preparer and the tax organizer given to both companies. Attempted to attach original return done by ATS but system would allow no other attachments. That is just one year that was done incorrectly. I also made a mistake when I said EVERY RETURN WAS DONE INCORRECTLY. 2008 and 2009 were done correctly because both years were based on W-2's not 1099. 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, and 2012...all done incorrectly. If I'm not mistaken it is a tax preparers job to know what business owners can claim as deductions and if they don't know then they should find out. I called many companies before choosing ATS because their website boasts being Revdex.com accredited. I could not find one negative review until this year, now there are an extreme amount. I hope something can be done about this company as it seems they take your money, do almost nothing, and think its okay. I would like to know what exactly they have done to receive 4,800.00, request 2,000.00 more and then cost me an additional 1,000.00. If more proof is needed please let me know. thank you
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Attached please find my letter from the IRS that Tax Authority did not contact them on my behalf.  Since Tax Authority has declined to send me any documentation to show the work done on my case and has not had their compliance department return my calls, proves that they have scammed me out of my money and refuse to work with me.  I in turn will be contacting any and all departments that will listen to my claim and show them proof of how Tax Authority misrepresented themselves and took my money. 
Regards,
[redacted]

March
31, 2014
0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0in;"> 
 
FROM:   [redacted], Compliance
Director
              
AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC
              
7535 Irvine Center Dr., Ste. 200
              
Irvine, CA  92618
 
RE:  [redacted]
 
RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT:
 
On November 27, 2013, the Plaintiff-Client
contacted the Defendant-Business, seeking tax assistance for a Federal deficiency
of approximately $61,000.00.   In exchange for services rendered (per
the negotiated Contract), the Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendant $3,400.00
via monthly installments.  A payment plan was then approved by the
Plaintiff, made part of the Contract--- with payment tendered to Defendant to
start work. 
 
The Defendant promptly mailed a Welcome Packet
to the Plaintiff, which provided all needed financial forms, Tax Organizers
(TO’s) and directions for completing the required Client questionnaire--- the
answers, to which, to be imputed into an IRS Form 433-A (OIC) for resolution
purposes.  Lastly, a legally binding Form 2848 (Power of Attorney
& Declaration of Representative), along w/ Form 8821 (Tax Information
Authorization) was executed by the Plaintiff to facilitate the agreed-upon
Defendant services.  
 
Per the Agreement, Defendant duties were limited
to: (1) complete a required Compliance call(s) to the relevant Taxing
Agency(s); (2) fully review and analyze the Plaintiff’s financials/supporting
documents; and then (3) impute the verified information into an IRS Form 433---
required to negotiate ANY potential resolution with the IRS   (e.g.,
Offer in Compromise [OIC], Installment Agreement [IA], Penalty Abatement
[PA]).   All actions were successfully completed by the
Defendant, per the Contract.   
 
However, the Plaintiff became angry with the
Defendant, when the Plaintiff learned that the Defendant had not prepared or
filed his 2013 Tax filing.  When the Defendant
explained that the 2013 filing had not been contracted for by the Plaintiff,
the Plaintiff alleged wrongly that it had. 
When the Defendant offered a $300.00 refund to placate the misinformed
Plaintiff, the Plaintiff could not be reasoned with and eventually filed Complaint
with your office--- the point of this response. 
In reference to the Plaintiff’s alleged, general claim that the
Defendant acted unprofessionally and/or was in-attentive to the Plaintiff’s
needs, per the Agreement, our records are devoid of any such evidence.  In
fact, the record shows that the Defendant comported itself professionally at
all times and fully complied with the four corners of the binding Agreement.
All Compliance calls were made by the Defendant, per the Agreement; all
financials were reviewed, analyzed, compiled and then accurately documented in
a 433 as well, per the Agreement.  A reasonable resolution was fashioned with the IRS and the Contract was completed.
Conversely, the Plaintiff maligned the Defendant, when the Plaintiff
falsely accused the Defendant of not fulfilling its’ Contract---
based on nothing more than rote speculation. 
Therefore, the Revdex.com should view the Plaintiff-Client’s filed
Complaint with great skepticism, based on the facts, and find on behalf of the
Defendant-Business.
                             
Respectfully,
 -[redacted], Compliance Director
  AUTHORITY TAX SERVICES, LLC

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[Tax Authority is not providing accurate information. It is entirely false to state that I was not cooperating and not willing to fill out the forms. They are also lying that they did not tell me to contact the IRS. My contract is not void, I called and requested it be cancelled when I realized I did not need them to provide a service. They are using the contract as a way to penalize me and take 50% of my money of which they provided zero service. Once again, this goes to my original complaint. I was mislead and they stole $1200 in exchange for nothing. ]
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[The defendant stated I was not in compliance with the terms
of the contract. The contract clearly states if the customer is not in
compliance the defendant's firm will drop the customer. That never
happened.  In fact I have email
correspondents proving otherwise. The first correspondence was via email on
September 25, 2014 after I was assigned a case manager. At that point he sent
me all the information I needed to fill out which I did promptly.  I in fact complained on several occasions
about the lack of information being given to me via email. To that fact, I
never received any information from the defendant as to what correspondence
they had with the IRS. That is due to the fact they never contacted the IRS on
my behalf for a resolution until March 2014. Also, to add to the proof of their
deception and fraud, I was told by a manager and a supervisor at Authority Tax
Services that in fact they could never have done an offer in compromise for me
due to the fact I only owed the IRS $10,600. I was told the minimum offer was
$20,000. This fact directly contradicts what I was told by my initial contacts
with the defendant, [redacted] and his manager. I asked them directly after
they told me, not negotiated the cost of their services would be $2300. If I pay
you $2300, and you settle with the IRS for $8000, why should I pay you? Their
direct quote was, "Mr. [redacted], in reviewing your financial situation
being in a state of hardship. The IRS knows it can't get blood from a stone. You
have a good case Mr. [redacted] or we wouldn't accept it" Furthermore, I
called and emailed the defendant for an accounting of what was done on my
behalf after they closed my case, as well as went to their Irvine Office in
person to ask for an accounting of what was done on behalf. My case manager
told me he could not give that information to me for fear he would lose his job
for helping me in case of any potential lawsuit. The email was never returned,
and the case manager supervisor I met with asked me to put everything in writing
and she would get the information to her boss, the C.O.O, and he would call me
back. I did email her my demand for a refund, not even for the whole $2300. I
offered the defendant to settle this matter for a refund of just $1300. I know
things were done on my behalf, but what I was told what would be done on my
behalf was clearly not done. The proof is the fact they will not give me a full
accounting of exactly what the defendant communicated with the IRS and what
they actually attempted to negotiate on my behalf. Also, at the time of initial
financial interview at the offices of the defendant in September 2013, my IRA
account had approximately $600 in it and my wife's 401K was worth $14000 with
an outstanding loan to match therefore it could not be borrowed against. The
defendant knew those facts since September 2013. To sum up the level of
customer service I received from Authority Tax Services, I spoke with a
customer service manager in the Los Angeles office named [redacted]. He
asked me the same question about my IRA and 401k after I asked to speak to a
manager about what they called a resolution. Mr. [redacted] mocked and treated me
very disrespectfully when I civilly expressed my frustration at the lack of
service I had received up to that point and the fact they accused me of not
including that information from the beginning. I have the original paperwork
stating I did disclose those facts, as well as the defendant. After Mr.
[redacted] clearly proved he didn't care about my concerns of the appearance of
fraud, I asked to speak to his manager. He told her name was [redacted] and
she wasn't in the office and did not have voice-mail. I had my wife call the
Los Angeles office after getting off the phone with Mr. [redacted] and ask for
[redacted]. She was told Ms. [redacted] was not in and given her voice-mail. That
call was never returned either. It is clear the defendant did not provide
honest services. The lies and outright fraud is documented and vibrantly
apparent, as they could not account for anything that was done from September
2013 till March 2014. The reason I said I could have done this myself is
because I called the IRS before I called Authority Tax Service and got the
details of setting up a payment plan. It was not difficult what so ever.]
Regards,
[redacted]