Crosstown Auto Body

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
*** *** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:I have now gone online and paid the actual tolls of only $ I spoke with LGBS today and they said Harris County toll road authority offered to waive the feesHowever, LGBS would still require me to pay their fees of $ I do not think it is fair for the collection agency to require me to pay for their service when I did not require or request their service It seems like they are only out for a pay day and not out to actually resolve the issue Regards,
*** ***

We have tested the phone number in question several times todayat different times of the day. When we are given the prompt that allowsus to connect to a live collector during business hours, we have not hadthe difficulty that MrTwerski claims to experience. If he will give us a good phone number, we will contact him directly to discuss the matter.Thanks,*** ***

Revdex.com:
I called the number on the letter you send me times and the ladies I talked to kept telling me this they said I had ticketsIm save this email as proof that you all said thisThamnk you.
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
*** ***

Mr*** states in his complaint that NYSTA failed to charge his EZ-PASS twice when he responded to the original invoices Our client did not record a EZ-PASS device when his vehicle was captured using the tolls and the invoices were mailed to the registered address of the vehicle per the
license plate Further, NYSTA records do not reflect receiving a payment or correspondence in relation to the violation invoices prior to collections Per NYSTA policy, the balance of $is due in full.We have spoken with Mr*** and informed him the account was reviewed and that the amount was owed While unhappy with the determination, he paid the balance in full

Express Lanes is well aware of the status of Ms** ** ***’s account. We stand by our previous response

Complaint: ***Thank you all for your prompt reply. I respectfully reject this response because I never received an invoice until it was sent to my father's address. As a military member, I was deployed overseas from April-October of and I never received the invoice. Coincidently, I was able to receive and pay toll bills from Texas Tags during the same month. They used the same DMV address and was able to send the invoice which was paid in full and on time. However, according to the last response, HCTRA and the collection agency's mail came back as "mail return". I feel like I should not be held responsible for a failure by the US Postal Service to deliver my mail and should pay the original fee of $35.75, which I am happy to pay. Attached are my deployment orders which show the period I was serving overseas.Thank you for your time, and your generosity is greatly appreciated. I hope you have a pleasant day!
Sincerely,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: Sending the tolls to collections before days late is unacceptableI did not receive any notices of tolls until I received the collection noticeThey are also vauge about the dollars in tolls that they say I incurred, and I disagree that I used the tollway for dollarsPlease elaborate, and provide me with an itimized statementOtherwise, we can settle the account now for dollars
Regards,
*** ***

I am responding to the consumer complaint filed with your office by [redacted].  Mr. [redacted]’s complaint regards unpaid toll violations incurred on a tollway operated by our client, the Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA).HCTRA has confirmed that Mr. [redacted] did have a valid NTTA toll tag at the...

time he used HCTRA’s roadway.  His account was unable to be credited at the time of the toll usage because Mr. [redacted] failed to have the correct license plate on the NTTA account.  As such, NTTA was unable to match the HCTRA transactions to his account.  As a courtesy, HCTRA has agreed to waive the fees assessed and charge him tolls only.Mr. [redacted]’s payment has been received and sent to HCTRA for processing, including issuing of a refund for any overpayment received.  Respectfully,[redacted]

Our records (which are automatically generated by our system as calls are placed/received) do not reflect any communication from Mr. [redacted] either by phone or in writing.    We have no record of ever being provided with any identifying information - including date of birth.Based on receipt of a copy of the letter addressed to the Court (and attached to this complaint rejection response), we now know a date of birth which allows us to conduct appropriate inquiry and review of the matter.    In conducting this review - and having the now known ability to compare identifying information (including DOB), it does appear that our communications have been received by the incorrect [redacted].    We have made appropriate notation in our file and have removed the address of the incorrect [redacted].    We do sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.As an additional aside, various agencies appear to have the incorrect [redacted] (with DOB information) AND the other [redacted] (with his DOB information) located at the same physical residence address.    This fact did cause a double-confusion element as we attempted to resolve this complaint/matter without having appropriate identifying information from the incorrect [redacted].

Mr. [redacted]’s complaint regards unpaid toll violations owed to our client, the Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA).  Mr. [redacted] states in his complaint that he did not own the vehicle and had not been in the area when the toll violations occurred.  HCTRA captured a vehicle operating...

on the their EZ-Tag only lanes without a valid toll tag a total of six times from 11/6/2015 through 3/31/16.  The vehicle license plate was registered to Mr. [redacted] out of the State of Kansas at the time of the violations.  HCTRA mailed out their first invoice on 1/19/2016 containing three of the violations and the second invoice was mailed on 4/12/16 containing the remaining three.  There is also un-invoiced balance in the amount of $4.75.  Mr. [redacted] had contacted HCTRA prior to his account being referred to collections but the matter was not resolved.Mr. [redacted] called in to LGBS and spoke with an agent on 4/5/16.  Mr. [redacted] stated the vehicle was claimed as a total loss by his insurance company and he would be providing documents proving he was not in possession of the vehicle during the times of the violations.  The documentation was never received. W contacted Mr. [redacted] and he again stated the vehicle was not in his possession when the tolls occurred due to a claim of total loss by his insurance company.  We explained that the vehicle was registered to him at the time of the violations, which is why he is being held liable for the balance.  Mr. [redacted] stated that he will fax in documentation proving he was not in possession of the vehicle during the time of the violations.  He was informed that he will be responsible for the balance until it is resolved.

On 2/27/2017, Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP (the firm) received parking violation [redacted] from SP Plus Corporation (the client) for “Non-payment Daily Fee” at [redacted]. The violation was for $15.00 and issued on 1/12/2017 at 10:45 AM to a vehicle...

with Mississippi license plate [redacted].On 2/27/2017, the firm skip-traced the license plate number provided to a [redacted] at [redacted], and on 3/6/2017, the firm mailed out an initial collection notice to that address.On 3/14/2017, [redacted] (maiden name [redacted]) called in to the firm and stated that she never owned this vehicle. The Collector advised her to send in a letter of dispute and provided the firm fax number.On 3/15/2017, the firm received Revdex.com Complaint # [redacted]. A review of the skip-tracing efforts for MS license plate [redacted] was instituted, and it was determined that the Debtor was misidentified. The correct Debtor with a similar name was identified and on 3/16/2016 the Debtor information associated to violation # [redacted] was corrected and a letter clearing [redacted] of Rawlins, WY was generated and mailed.As of 3/16/2017, the firm is no longer associating [redacted] of Rawlins, WY with parking violation [redacted].Please let me know if you have any questions or require my assistance in any way.Thank you,

Mr. [redacted] complaint regards delinquent unpaid tolls and fees owed to our client, the Elizabeth River Tunnels (ERT).  Mr. [redacted] was originally billed by ERT for two tolls that occurred on 8/21/2015 that were not charged to an E-ZPASS account as referenced on the complaint.  These tolls...

were invoiced and mailed out the registered address of the vehicle on 9/2/15.  This was not resolved with ERT and after two additional invoices mailed to the same address, the account was referred to collections on 2/10/2016.  The current balance of $35.00 is due in full.

Ms. [redacted] was issued a City of Chicago parking ticket, # [redacted], for parking in an alley on November 17, 2014.  Ms. [redacted] sent a letter to contest theticket by mail which is dated December 17, 2014.  The original fine was $150.00 for this violation.  The record is noted...

regarding the contesting of the ticket by mail on December 26, 2014.  Notes indicated a mail hearing was completed on March 20, 2015.  The City of Chicago Department of Administrative Hearings found Ms. [redacted] liable for theviolation.  A Decision Hearing letter was mailed to Ms. [redacted] at [redacted].  The letter informed Ms. [redacted], as the registered owner, that she was found liable and was responsible for the fine of $150.00.  The letter informed her that she had twenty-five days from the date of the determination, 3-20-2015, to pay the fine or a penalty equal to the fine would be added.The City did not receive payment for the violation.  Additional notices were sent to Ms. [redacted] on 4-23-15, 5-15-15, and 6-5-15 at her address of record.  The City referred the violation to our law firm on August 10,2015 for collections.  The City adds a 22% collection fee to the violation when it has to refer tickets to an outside firm.  I have attached the City of Chicago Department of Administrative Hearings letter for your review. As of today, the full amount of $366 remains due. Thank you for the opportunity to explain this request for payment,[redacted]312/526-1207

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: unreasonable extra fees added.
Regards,
[redacted]

This law firm has been attempting to serve [redacted] who owns certain real property in [redacted], Texas regarding a claim for delinquent property taxes.  A [redacted] County Deputy Constable attempted to serve him at the property in question on multiple occassions.  The return of the...

citation filed by the Deputy Constable indicates that he was told by the person at the address of the property in [redacted] that the owner was located at an address in [redacted] Tx.  Using the information provided in this manner, we attempted to serve the proper person at the address provided in [redacted].  [redacted], who filed this complaint, is at the [redacted] address.  It does appear that the reference to the address in [redacted] TX was incorrect and that the [redacted] address was that of a person with a similar name.  On behlaf of our firm, I apologiz to Mr. [redacted] of [redacted], TX.  We have noted in our system that he is not the correct individual and we will not issue citations to his address or contact him again.  If Mr. [redacted] needs additional information, he can contact [redacted], a partner in the firm of Linebarger, Goggan at [redacted]

We stand by our previous response and consider this matter closed.

No, we are not liars.  HCTRA confirmed that USPS records show that they mailed their letter on February 22, 2016.  USPS records show that the letter was received in Oklahoma City on February 25, 2016.  We stand by our previous response and the amount remains due and owing. We have uploaded the mailing schedule file from HCTRA that shows the letter sent and received at your listed address.

This letter is in response to the correspondence sent to the Revdex.com, by Mr. [redacted] on February 7, 2017, in reference to Complaint #[redacted]. The law firm of Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP ("LGBS") represents the City of Chicago ("City") as Special Assistant...

Corporation Counsel for matters related to parking citations.As an initial matter, LGBS disputes the allegations that Mr. [redacted] lists in his correspondence. His complaint appears to be an attempt to pay a reduced amount of the debt that he owes to the City for his outstanding parking citations.We have reviewed the evidence and now provide the following response. A summary of theunderlying facts follows.BACKGROUNDBetween January 24, 2005 and December 29, 2006, Mr. [redacted] incurred twenty-six City parking citations on six different license plates. The City sent notices as required by law to the address as registered with the Illinois Secretary of State.On November 1, 2006, Mr. [redacted] entered into a Hardship/Student payment plan with the City, and made a down payment of $310.00 to obtain the release of a "boot" from his vehicle. No monthly payments were received, and he was defaulted from the payment plan.On August 9, 2007, the City sent Mr. [redacted] a "Notice of Driver's License Suspension" as a result of the number of citations outstanding. No payment was received, and on November 29, 2007, Mr. [redacted] Driver's License ([redacted]) was suspended with the Illinois Secretary of State pursuant to section 6-306.5 of the Illinois Vehicle Code ([redacted]).These citations were then referred to LGBS for collection. Mr. [redacted] contacted LGBS via phone fourteen times between October 3, 2013 and February 7, 2017, as well as through his attorney, regarding his debt for outstanding City parking citations. These contacts set forth the following timeline.On October 30, 2013, LGBS registered an administrative judgment against Mr. [redacted] with the Circuit Court of Cook County (case number [redacted]) for outstanding City parking citations in the amount of $3,952.80.On December 8, 2014, Mr. [redacted] contacted LGBS regarding a wage garnishment action that had been filed against his prior employer. He was advised which of his license plates the outstanding citations had been issued to, and that he would need to enter into a payment plan to release the suspension of his Driver's License. He stated that he was unemployed at that time, and could not afford payment arrangements.On November 19, 2015, Mr. [redacted] attorney, [redacted], filed an appearance as well as a motion contesting a (second) pending wage garnishment action filed against Mr. [redacted] then employer. After discussions with Mr. [redacted], the matter was continued until January 6, 2016 to allow for Mr. [redacted] to pay off the judgment and avoid the garnishment. At that time, no one appeared on Mr. [redacted] behalf, and a wage deduction withholding order was entered for the then judgment amount of $4,003.26. LGBS was subsequently contacted by the employer who advised that Mr. [redacted] employment had been terminated.On February 2, 2016, Mr. [redacted] contacted LGBS and was advised that he would need to enter into a payment plan to release the suspension of his Driver's License. He again stated that he was unemployed, and could not afford payment arrangements.On January 11, 2017, a third wage garnishment action was filed against Mr. [redacted] employer.On January 30, 2017, LGBS received an answer from the employer, confirming that Mr. [redacted] is currently employed and that they had begun withholding from his pay checks.Later that day, Mr. [redacted] contacted LGBS when he was advised that he owed for additional citations which were not included in the judgment in the amounts of $4,172.40 for citations, $20.00 for the Driver's License Suspension Certification Fee and $75.57 for court costs. Mr. [redacted] authorized a card payment via phone in the amount of $4,247.97, which was less than the total amount due. The payment was declined by the card issuer, and no payment was received.On February 7, 2017, Mr. [redacted] contacted LGBS seeking a receipt for his January 30, 2017 payment, and was advised that the payment had been declined, so no receipt was generated. Mr. [redacted] requested that LGBS make a second attempt to process the payment using the same card. The second payment attempt was also declined, and no payment was received.That same day, Mr. [redacted] contacted LGBS and provided a different card for payment, authorizing the amount of $4,247.97, which was less than the total amount due. A LGBS representative then contacted Mr. [redacted] to advise that his third payment attempt had been successfully processed, and that there was still a remaining balance of $20.00 outstanding, which he would need to satisfy in order to receive the certified letter necessary to obtain the release of suspension of his Illinois Driver's License. Mr. [redacted] disputed that the he should have to pay the Driver's License Suspension Certification Fee, stating that he would contact his credit card company and ask them to reject his payment of $4,247.97. He also requested a copy of his receipt, which was sent to the mailing address that he provided.ANALYSISThrough his many contacts with LGBS, Mr. [redacted] was advised multiple times over a longer than two year period that he owed separate amounts for the outstanding citations, court costs, and Driver's License Suspension Certification Fee.He now asserts that he should be allowed to pay less than the full amount due because he was unaware of the existence of the $20.00 fee that was charged to his account when his Driver's License was suspended, back in 2007.  CONCLUSION In summary, Mr. [redacted] dispute seemed to arise when he was advised that the amount of the payment he had authorized did not include the $20.00 Driver's License Suspension Certification Fee, because it was not a part of the judgment.The Illinois Secretary of State's records indicate that Mr. [redacted] license has been suspended since 2007. LGBS records indicate that Mr. [redacted] was aware of the $20.00 fee for the Driver's License Suspension since at least 2014.Mr. [redacted] has paid all of his citations in the amount of $4,172.40, and court costs in the amount of $75.57. The Driver's License Suspension Certification Fee remains outstanding.Accordingly, his driver's license remains suspended. In order to release the suspension, he may contact our office to pay the remaining $20.00 fee.I hope that I have addressed your concerns. If you have any other questions or require further information, please feel free to contact me at [redacted].Sincerely, [redacted] Attorney

Following additional review of the circumstances, our client has advised that they have dismissed the parking citation in question.    As a result, the account has been recalled from our office and there will be no additional action taken by our law firm.