Wall & Associates, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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 belowI demand a full refund of the $3,750.00 I paid you.  You did nothing for me except waste my time and cause me to miss crucial deadlines with the IRS.When you accomplish nothing, you should get paid nothing.The issue with the IRS was not whether or not I had the receipts to document my expenses.  The issue was whether or not they would recognize me as an active real estate participant.  You still don't get it.You say you need more time.  I gave you a year and you accomplished nothing.  I repeatedly asked you for an expected time frame and a plan of action.  Even now you have not provided either one.  Of course it is to your advantage to drag things out and do nothing because you would have received $350 per month, thereby increasing your undeserved compensation.Your offer is rejected.
Regards,
[redacted]

RE: Ms. [redacted]., Revdex.com Case#: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted], We are writing in...

response to the recent complaint filed against our company regarding the fees paid and services rendered to Ms. [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] sought out and hired our services in April of 2015 for administrative tax representation. In Ms. [redacted]'s complaint she states that she feels our office was unethical in our dealings with her regarding her case. Wall & Associates, Inc. is one of the leading tax representation and negotiation firms in the industry and as such we have a wide range of satisfied clients whose tax controversies we have successfully resolved. Our office in good faith did offer to alter the payment terms, Ms. [redacted] had previously willingly agreed to, in order to better accommodate her current financial situation. Our office, at no point, was deceptive with Ms. [redacted] regarding the expected timeframes involving her case. Our office does not give out expected timeframes regarding the resolution to a case, but we do acknowledge the process can sometimes be time consuming. Dealing with a third party government agency, the Internal Revenue Service, can sometimes result in timeframes that are longer than may be anticipated. During the time Ms. [redacted] has been with our office she has not had to engage the IRS directly and our office has handled all applicable communications with them. Our office has represented her, in both a competent and professional manner, while actively working to progress her case forward. She has responded to inquiries as our office has requested information and we have been utilizing the information we have been provided. Our office does apologize for the timeframe the case is taking, but unexpected delays will always arise when dealing with the IRS. We would like nothing more than to resolve Ms. [redacted]'s concerns and to quickly put this matter behind us in order to continue our representation of her case. We request that she, once again, reach out to our office and allow us to continue working with her in continuing active work on her case. Our office remains open to honoring the previously offered arrangement or discussing alternative arrangements with her. If you require any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for your time and assistance with this matter. Sincerely, Wall & Associates, Inc.

Dear Ms. [redacted], We are writing in timely response to the
additional comments for the above referenced complaint received on September
16, 2015 (copy enclosed). Mrs. [redacted] continues to state a wrong timeframe of our
relationship. She hired our office in July 2011 as we previously stated. She
ended payments to our office for our service at the end of January 2015. Thus,
we worked with her for approximately three and a half years. During that time,
the case was on a non-working status for approximately seven months, further
reducing the actual working time we had on the case. Therefore, Mrs. [redacted]’s
continued statements of being our client for five years is not correct. From
December 2011 through February 2012, Mrs. [redacted] made no payments to our office
for her regular monthly billing. No payments were made from September 2013
through December 2013, and April through May 2014. In addition to those times
in which no payments were made (but we continued to perform work on the case),
we waived the following monthly fees for the [redacted]s in order to assist them with
the case and to act in good faith for our clients: • October 15, 2013 - the
monthly fees for September and October 2013 were waived (totaling $700) •
September 11, 2014 – the monthly fees for August and September 2014 were
deferred to the end of the case. (Totaling $700). • The client’s fee was
permanently reduced by $50/month (to $300 per month) starting with the October
2014 billing Mrs. [redacted] last made a payment to our office on January 30, 2015.
No further payments were made after that. The clients were well aware that
their case was placed into a non-working status early in 2015 due to failure to
make payments. We did however, again in good faith, continue to assist with IRS
contact after the clients ceased to make any payments. The deferred fees
mentioned above for the months of August and September 2014 were never paid by
the client at the end of the case. These fees are still due to our office per
the agreement we made with Mrs. [redacted] at that time. The fees were not waived in
full. Mrs. [redacted] stated that she met with our company’s Vice President which is
also untrue. Mrs. [redacted] met with one our employees initially regarding her tax
matter. She did not meet with a company officer. With all due respect, Mrs.
[redacted] continued to file tax returns late, and to accrue new tax debts on those
returns once they were filed. This happened for tax years 2012 and 2013. Our
office advised Mrs. [redacted] that because the tax debts were so low on those
returns, she should pay the balances. Instead, however, Mrs. [redacted] wanted the
balances included in an Offer in Compromise with the IRS which we were
planning. Taxpayers must be compliant with all filing requirements, meaning
they must file timely tax returns by the due date and pay any balance due on
the return. We advise all of our clients of this IRS requirement so that we can
plan to submit a worthy, effective, Offer in Compromise for a client. Accruing
new tax debts while an Offer is pending with the IRS almost always immediately
leads to the closure and return of the Offer. This is a fact we have seen over
and over in our work. Mrs. [redacted]’s comments also refer to complaints filed
against Wall & Associates, Inc. The fact is, the number of complaints filed
against our office accounts for a very small percentage of our clientele. In
this day and age unfortunately people take to the Internet to complain very
quickly, but rarely to praise any service. Positive resolutions exist widely in
our company for our clients. As our website states, in the past 5 years we have
reduced the amount our clients owe the IRS by over $100 million dollars. We
have settled numerous IRS Offers in Compromise for only $1. We have settled
hundreds more Offers for $100 or less. Testimonials from clients are found on
our website, www.wallandassociates.net. Even more testimonials can be found at [redacted] It should also be pointed out that
many people who have a tax problem wish to remain anonymous because they are
embarrassed, worried for their job or community reputation, or simply do not
want friends and family to know. Therefore, they are reluctant to send
referrals even though we promise clients that we protect their privacy. It is
unfortunate that Mrs. [redacted] continues to state inaccuracies in attempts to
complain against our company. In good faith again with the client, and to
resolve this complaint, we will offer to refund her one monthly fee of $300. We
will send the necessary paperwork to her to sign if she is agreeable to this
resolution. We have worked very hard for Mrs. [redacted] and tried to assist with her
case. Our work helped her to avoid IRS bank and wage levies, seizures, and
other intrusive collection action. This refund offer is only a means to
reconcile this complaint that continues to stay unresolved. We hope that we can
bring this matter to a close as soon as possible. If you require any further
information, please contact our office. Thank you for your time and assistance
with this matter. Sincerely, Wall & Associates, Inc.

Dear Ms. [redacted], We are writing in response to the recent
complaint filed against our company regarding the fees paid and services
rendered. Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] sought out and hired our services in June of 2011
for administrative tax representation. The case team rapidly acted on the
[redacted]s’ case...

to work towards resolving their tax matters. Below you will find a
summary of the actions completed since receipt of the case for administrative tax
resolution. Upon receipt of Robert & [redacted]’s case on July 21, 2011,
we immediately contacted them that day to verify the information we received
with the case, to provide our contact information, and to obtain background
information regarding their tax matter. Additionally, Power of Attorney forms
were immediately filed with the IRS to make our representation known. An
introductory letter was then mailed to them that introduced their case team,
and requested specific financial documents in order to begin evaluating
possible resolutions regarding their tax matter. We scheduled a conference call
with them for March 3, 2011. On February 15, 2011, our office contacted the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and ordered additional documentation to assist
with the review of their case. We were notified by the IRS representative that
there were currently 1040 balances for tax years 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 in
the amount of $28,581.07, and the 2008 and 2009 Form 1040 returns had not been
filed. On February 16, 2011, we mailed a request to the IRS for a hold to be
placed on Mr. & Mrs. [redacted]’s account while we reviewed their financial
information to evaluate possible resolution options. We contacted Mr. &
Mrs. [redacted] for the scheduled conference call on March 3, 2011 and a message was
left. Our office spoke with them on March 7, 2011, and we rescheduled the
conference call for March 21, 2011. We held a conference call with them on
March 21, 2011. At that time, we discussed the balance information we received
from the IRS and went over the financial statement to begin evaluating possible
resolutions for the tax matter. We then updated the IRS form 433-A, Collection
Information Statement, from the information we had received. On April 5, 2011,
our office received the unsigned tax returns for periods 2008 and 2009. We
contacted Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] that day to discuss the unsigned returns, and a
message was left. Upon receipt of the signed tax returns on April 13, 2011, our
office mailed them to the IRS for processing. In May 2011, our office began
reviewing the Notice of Deficiency for tax year 2008 that was issued as a
result of the return not being filed prior to April 4, 2011. We discussed this
notice with Mrs. [redacted] in detail on May 31, 2011. From the end of June 2011 through
the end of November 2011 we were forced to stop work on the case due to payment
delinquency by the clients. We resumed work on November 28, 2011. That day we
spoke with Mrs. [redacted] regarding a levy that had been issued. We requested
updated financial information from them in order to work toward the release of
the levy. We contacted the IRS Automated Collection Service on November 29,
2011 and successfully negotiated a reduction of the levy. We immediately
contacted the [redacted]s that day to discuss the partial release and the work that
had been completed. We spoke with the clients on December 2, 2011, December 6,
2011, and December 8, 2011 and discussed their case in detail. We spoke with
the IRS on December 9, 2011 and obtained an update on the Installment Agreement
(IA) request to fully release the levies. We were notified that an IRS manager
still needed to approve the IA to fully release the wage and Social Security
levies. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] that day to discuss the progress towards the
full release of the levies. Our office again spoke with the IRS on December 13,
2011 to obtain an update on the levy releases, and we were notified it was
still pending manager approval. We left a message for Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] on
December 13, 2011 and again on December 14, 2011 with this update. On December
15, 2011, our office spoke with the IRS again regarding the levy releases and
was notified that it would be faxed on that date. We contacted Mr. and Mrs.
[redacted] that day to discuss this, and a message was left. On January 3, 2012, our
office discussed a notice Mrs. [redacted] had recently received and requested that
she fax it to our office for review. We contacted Mrs. [redacted] on January 24, 2012
and discussed the Notice of Federal Tax Lien filing and the appeal rights that
would be implemented by our office. On January 26, 2012, our office filed a
Collection Due Process Hearing request with the IRS in response to the Notice
of Federal Tax Lien filing. On February 6, 2012, our office updated IRS Form
433-A Collection Information Statement, in order to plan for an ultimate case
resolution. We contacted Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] on February 10, 2012 to discuss the
Form 433-A, and a message was left requesting a returned call. On February 14,
2012, our office discussed the updated Form 433-A with Mrs. [redacted] and the next
steps to move forward towards a resolution. We also discussed that Mr. [redacted]’s
employment had recently ended. We contacted Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] on March 30, 2012
to provide a case update, and a message was left. On April 13, 2012, our office
discussed the filing status of the 2011 1040 tax return with Mrs. [redacted], and we
were notified it would be filed by the deadline. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] on
April 17, 2012 regarding the E-File of the 2011 1040 being rejected, that the
problem was being corrected, and the return would be re-filed. We received a
copy of the 2011 1040 return on April 19, 2012 from the [redacted]s. We mailed
updated IRS Power of Attorney forms to Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] on May 21, 2012 for their
signatures in order to update our representation authorization. Further, in
response to IRS Final Notice of Intent to Levy for tax year 2010 for 1040, we
filed a Collection Due Process Hearing Request with the IRS. On June 14, 2012,
our office contacted Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] to discuss the need for the Power of
Attorney forms sent previously for their signature, and a message was left. On
June 15, 2012, we received the Power of Attorney forms and left a message for
the [redacted]s that day indicating receipt of the forms. We also mailed a hold
request letter to the IRS on July 23, 2012 in response to a notice of intent to
levy issued on tax year 2011 to prevent further collection action. We contacted
the clients on July 30, 2012 to provide a case update, and once again, a
message was left. We contacted Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] on September 14, 2012 to
discuss the case plan, and a message was left. On October 1, 2012, we discussed
the IRS Form 433-A, Collection Information Statement, with [redacted] in detail.
Additionally, we requested updated financial documents in order to ensure that
the form was correct and up to date with their current financial situation.
Subsequently, we mailed a letter to Mr. [redacted] requesting the documentation we
needed from him. We contacted Mrs. [redacted] on November 16, 2012 to discuss the
case and obtain an update on the documentation we had requested the previous
month. A conference call was scheduled with Mrs. [redacted] for November 21, 2012 to
thoroughly discuss the case. We contacted her on November 21, 2012 for the
scheduled conference call, and a message was left. On November 26, 2012, we
spoke with her and rescheduled the conference call for later that day. We held
the conference call with her and discussed the Form 433-A in detail. We
explained our plan to resolve the liability and that once we completed the Form
433-A for Mr. [redacted], we would be able to move forward with resolution on the
case. We updated Form 433-A for Mrs. [redacted] on November 27, 2012 with the
documentation we received via facsimile. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] on December 4,
2012 and December 31, 2012 to discuss the case. On January 10, 2013, our office
provided Mrs. [redacted] with a case update. We mailed IRS Form 433-A to Mr. [redacted] on
January 11, 2013 and again requested the financial information needed in order
to complete case planning for an ultimate resolution to resolve the tax
liability. Subsequently, we contacted the IRS and obtained the updated total
account balance of $53,817.05. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] again on January 22,
2013 and discussed the current status of the case. We received notification
from the IRS that the previously requested Collection Due Process Hearing had
been scheduled. We immediately contacted the Settlement Officer assigned and
left a message on February 11, 2013. Additionally, we spoke with Mrs. [redacted] and
discussed the plan for the upcoming hearing. On February 12, 2013, our office
rescheduled the Collection Due Process Hearing with the Settlement Officer due
to a scheduling conflict. We discussed this with Mrs. [redacted] on February 15,
2013. On February 19, 2013, our office held the scheduled Collection Due
Process Hearing with the IRS in which additional documentation was requested,
and a follow-up call was scheduled for March 5, 2013. We then contacted Mrs.
[redacted] to discuss the results of the call and to request the information we still
needed from Mr. [redacted]. We spoke with Mr. [redacted] on February 20, 2013 regarding his
IRS Form 433-A, and the documentation we required. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] on
February 25, 2013 and provided the plan for the follow up on the Collection Due
Process Hearing. We held the Appeal update call with the Settlement Officer on
March 5, 2013 and agreed to send the IRS Forms 433-A and supporting financial
documentation. We then submitted all of the information requested by the
Settlement Officer for his review and determination on the case. We spoke with
Mrs. [redacted] in regards to this on March 11, 2013. We contacted the Settlement
Officer on March 12, 2013 for an update on the review of the financial documentation
and left a message. We provided Mrs. [redacted] with a case status update on March
25, 2013. We contacted the IRS Settlement Officer on March 26, 2013 and again
left a message. On April 1, 2013, our office received the Notice of
Determination for the Appeals Hearing stating that the account was placed into
Currently Non-Collectable Status with the IRS. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] that day
to discuss the Notice of Determination and discussed the tax court rights that
come with this notice. We spoke with Robert [redacted] on April 8, 2013 regarding the
tax court waiver we had previously mailed. We provided Mrs. [redacted] with a case
status update on April 9, 2013. On April 15, 2013, we discussed with Mrs. [redacted]
the Married Filing Separate tax liability shown on the 2012 form 1040 tax
return and advised her that we would attempt to include this in our ultimate
resolution. On April 16, 2013, Mrs. [redacted] notified our office that she would not
be filing separately but would instead file jointly for 2012. On May 16, 2013,
our office updated IRS Form 433-A for the two separate households and mailed
them to Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] for review and signature. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted]
on May 29, 2013 and provided her with a case update. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] on
June 3, 2013 and verbally updated the IRS Form 433-A, and requested updated
income statements. Additionally, we discussed how the IRS calculates the
ability to repay. We mailed a request to the IRS on June 14, 2013 regarding
Currently NonCollectable Status to ensure all tax liabilities were placed in
this status. We provided Mrs. [redacted] with a case update on June 24, 2013 and June
25, 2013. Upon complete review of the Financial Information Statement, it was
determined that the Offer in Compromise was not in Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]’s best
interest to resolve the liability at that time. On June 27, 2013, we addressed
concerns Mrs. [redacted] expressed regarding the case, we scheduled an additional
call with Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] for July 1, 2013. Subsequently, we prepared a
request to our Client Services Group to further assist Mrs. [redacted]’s needs and
the concerns she expressed to her case team. On July 1, 2013, our office
conducted a complete review of Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]’s case. We additionally
reviewed their financial statements to review and determine their position
relative to the IRS Offer in Compromise program. We held the conference call
with Mrs. [redacted] and addressed the case history. She informed our office of
additional monthly expenses, and we discussed financial planning options with
her that would out them in a better position for an IRS settlement. On July 2,
2013, our office submitted a Collection Due Process Hearing request with the
IRS regarding the 2011 Final Notice of Intent to Levy we received. We then
faxed the IRS Form 433-A to Mrs. [redacted] for review. Subsequently, she contacted
our office, and we verbally discussed the form and her financial situation
relative to what would be necessary for an IRS Offer in Compromise settlement
to be a viable option to resolve the liability. On August 12, 2013, we discussed
the plan for the upcoming Collection Due Process Hearing with Mrs. [redacted]. We
contacted her again on August 15, 2013 to discuss the financial changes she had
previously indicated would occur, and notified her that per the IRS rules and
regulations for claiming a dependent, her mother did not qualify. On August 19,
2013, we provided Mrs. [redacted] with our fax number to send over the updated
financial documentation to support the financial changes. We spoke with her
again on August 28, 2013 and August 30, 2013 to discuss the case. We contacted
the Settlement Officer on September 10, 2013 for the Collection Due Process
Hearing and rescheduled it pursuant to the Settlement Officer’s request. The
call was scheduled for September 26, 2013. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] regarding
this on September 20, 2013. We held the Collection Due Process Hearing on
September 26, 2013. At that time we were unable to come to an agreed collection
alternative with the Settlement Officer as the 2012 Form 1040 tax return had
not been filed. We discussed the outcome of the hearing with Mrs. [redacted] on
September 30, 2013. On October 1, 2013, we spoke with Mrs. [redacted], and she
advised that she would mail the signed 2012 Form 1040 tax return to us. On
October 4, 2013, our office received notification from our accounting
department that Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]’s case had been placed into nonworking status
due to a payment discrepancy. We contacted Mrs. [redacted] that day and discussed the
payment discrepancy and advised her to contact our accounting department. On
October 5, 2013, our office mailed the 2012 1040 tax return to the IRS on Mr.
& Mrs. [redacted]’s behalf in good faith that a payment would be made to our
accounting department. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] on October 8, 2013 regarding the
issue with their account and addressed her concerns regarding her case. We then
submitted a request to our Client Services Group to assist her with her
concerns regarding the fees paid for the services being rendered. On October
15, 2013, we received notification from the accounting department that the
payment discrepancy had been resolved. We contacted Mrs. [redacted] on October 24,
2013 to discuss her case, and a message was left. On November 7, 2013, we
contacted the IRS to obtain updated account balance information for our records.
We then spoke with Mrs. [redacted] on November 7, 2013 and November 11, 2013. We
spoke with her again on December 2, 2013. On December 18, 2013, we submitted a
Currently Non-Collectable request to the IRS to ensure that collection holds
were being maintained on their account. On January 7, 2014, our office advised
Mrs. [redacted] that it would be in her best interest to pay the $146.59 balance due
for tax year 2012. We mailed her a reminder regarding their filing requirement
for the 2013 1040 tax return on January 20, 2014. On January 27, 2014, Mrs.
[redacted] advised our office that she wanted the 2012 balance to be included in the
resolution of her case. Additionally, she expressed concerns regarding the fees
paid for services being rendered. We provided her with our current case plan
for moving forward to resolve the liabilities. In order to update our
representation authorization, we mailed updated IRS Power of Attorney forms for
their signature. On February 4, 2014, our office received notification from our
accounting department that Mr. & Mrs. [redacted]’s case had been placed into
non-working status due to a payment discrepancy. Additionally, a request was
sent to our Client Services Group to review concerns expressed regarding the
fees paid. Subsequently, their financial situation was evaluated, and an
updated case plan was developed in which we would move toward an IRS Offer in
Compromise in order to resolve the liabilities. We discussed this with Mrs.
[redacted] on February 11, 2014. We advised her that we had submitted the request to
our Client Services Group to assist with the fees and that her account was
still in a non-working status. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] again on February 26,
2014 regarding this. On February 28, 2014, we again spoke with her, and she
continued to express concerns regarding the fees paid. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted]
on March 10, 2014, March 12, 2014, and again on March 13, 2014 and discussed
her case being reviewed by our Client Services Group for assistance with the
fees. We received notification from the accounting department that the payment
discrepancy had been resolved on March 14, 2014. We received notification that
she was not satisfied with the results of working with our Client Services
Group for fee assistance. A member of our management team contacted Mrs. [redacted]
on March 21, 2014 to discuss these concerns, and a message was left. She spoke
with our office on March 24, 2014 regarding her continued concerns. On March
27, 2014, we prepared and mailed a request for a Collection Due Process Hearing
to the IRS in response to a Final Notice of Intent to Levy dated March 15,
2014, and provided Mrs. [redacted] with a copy of the cover page to our
correspondence. On April 17, 2014, we were informed by our accounting
department that there was a payment discrepancy on Mr. & Mrs. [redacted]’s
account. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] regarding this status on April 21, 2014, and
explained that we were required to suspend active casework until this matter
was resolved. We also informed her that the case summary she requested had been
mailed out, and that she should be receiving it shortly. We briefly reviewed
the case on May 2, 2014 to determine the actions that needed to be taken once
the payment discrepancy had been resolved. We spoke to Mrs. [redacted] on May 6, 2014
regarding their case, and the need to make arrangements with our accounting
department. We also discussed that their unfiled tax return needed to be
prepared, and explained what would be needed for us to submit a settlement
request to the IRS. She requested a call back from a manager in order to
discuss their case and possible fee consideration. We spoke again on May 9, 2014
regarding possible fee consideration. We then informed her that they needed to
continue to work on getting compliant with the IRS because a settlement request
could not be submitted until all tax returns had been filed. We also explained
that we would need updated financial documentation in order to analyze their
financial situation. We called her back later that day to discuss why fee
consideration could not be granted, and the need for them to make a payment in
order for us to continue working on their case. On June 4, 2014 we received a
message, which Mrs. [redacted] had left on our website, asking for a team member to
contact her. We contacted her by telephone and left a message on her voicemail.
Later that day, we were informed by our accounting department that Mr. &
Mrs. [redacted]’s case had been made active, and we attempted to contact her again to
discuss the next actions that needed to be performed. We were able to give Mrs.
[redacted] a complete case update on June 26, 2014. We discussed the upcoming
Collection Due Process Hearing we were going to hold on their behalf, the need
for them to file their 2013 1040 Federal Income Tax Return, as well as the need
for updated pay statements that reflected the reduced hours Mrs. [redacted] had been
working. We attempted to contact Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] on July 8, 2014 regarding
the pay statements and 2013 Federal 1040 Income Tax Return that we had
previously requested, and were needed for the upcoming Collection Due Process
Hearing. We left a message on their voicemail. We mailed updated Power of
Attorney forms to them on July 29, 2014. On August 4, 2014 we spoke with Mrs.
[redacted] and discussed the Collection Due Process Hearing that was scheduled for
the following day. She informed us that their 2013 Federal 1040 Income Tax
Return had been prepared, and that she would attempt to fax a copy to us before
the hearing. We spoke to her the morning of August 5, 2014, and confirmed that
we had received the tax return. We called their Settlement Officer in order to
conduct the hearing, but she requested that it be postponed until August 7,
2014. We spoke to Mrs. [redacted] after this call and advised her to mail us the
payment for their 2013 Federal 1040 Income Tax Return, so we could submit it to
the IRS on their behalf. We contacted the IRS Settlement Officer on August 7,
2014, to hold the scheduled Collection Due Process Hearing. She informed us
that the clients’ 2008 and 2009 tax years were removed from Currently
Non-Collectible status when they filed the 2013 Federal 1040 Income Tax Return.
We argued that this should not have taken place, and that we were never
informed of this change in status. The Settlement Officer could not tell us why
they were removed, but stated that she could not assist us with this, and would
close out the case. We argued that she should place their account back into the
Currently Non-Collectible status, and that if she could not assist us, we
requested a call from her manager. She agreed to have her manager call us back.
We left a message with the Settlement Officer because we had still not heard
from her manager by August 15, 2014. On August 18, 2014 we updated Mrs. [redacted] on
the status of our negotiations. We were able to speak to the Settlement Officer
again on August 21, 2014. She stated that she could not agree to Currently
Non-Collectible status, and cited multiple reasons that did not apply to Mr.
& Mrs. [redacted]’s situation, and that we did not agree with. We again requested
to speak to her manager, and were promised a call back. We discussed the
progress of the hearing with Mrs. [redacted] later that day. On August 25, 2014 we
spoke to the Settlement Officer again, and she informed us that the case had
been transferred to a Settlement Officer who was above her, and that we should
receive a call shortly. On August 26, 2014, we spoke to the newly-appointed
Settlement Officer, Mr. [redacted], and described our request for Currently
Non-Collectible status, and our history with the previous officer. He agreed to
research their account and call us back when he had concluded his analysis. We
spoke to Mrs. [redacted] about our conversation with Mr. [redacted], and again stated our
need for updated financial documentation. We also mailed a letter to Mr. &
Mrs. [redacted] requesting this documentation. On September 5, 2014, we were
instructed by our accounting department to suspend active casework until she
contacted them to make payment arrangements. We received multiple IRS notices
on September 9, 2014, that contradicted each other regarding the determination
of the Collection Due Process Hearings we were still conducting. Despite the
status with our accounting department and in good faith, we attempted to
contact Settlement Officer [redacted] regarding these notices, and left a message
requesting a return call. We also spoke to Mrs. [redacted] regarding these notices,
the balance for their 2013 Federal 1040 Income Tax Return, and the financial
documentation we still required. Our Client Services Group agreed to fee
consideration with the [redacted]s and we received notification on September 11, 2014
that their account had returned to active status. We spoke in detail to
Settlement Officer [redacted] on September 18, 2014. He described the coding error
that had occurred with Mr. & Mrs. [redacted]’s account, and explained that the
account had been erroneously placed in Currently Not-Collectible status. He
further explained that the IRS had failed to issue the appropriate notices,
which would have alerted us to this error. He agreed to consider placing their
account into Currently Non-Collectible status if we could prove hardship with a
financial statement and substantiation by October 3, 2014. We contacted Mrs.
[redacted] on September 26, 2014, and again discussed the financial documentation we
needed, and the deadline to provide it to Settlement Officer [redacted]. We
attempted to contact Mrs. [redacted] on October 3, 2014, to discuss the documentation
that we still needed to meet Mr. [redacted]’s deadline. We left a message on her
voicemail. We spoke to Mrs. [redacted] on October 6, 2014, regarding the amount of
hours per week she had been working, and she stated that she would provide us
with the pay statement substantiation shortly. We sent letters to them via mail
and email on October 10, 2014, requesting the financial documentation, and we
solely received the pay statements later that day. We received a Notice of
Determination from Settlement Officer [redacted] on October 21, 2014, stating that
the Collection Due Process Hearing had been closed for failure to meet his
October 3, 2014 deadline. We discussed this notice with Mrs. [redacted] on October
29, 2014. We received a CP-2000 notice from the IRS on November 14, 2014. The
notice claimed that Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] had received Social Security benefits
in the 2012 tax year that were not reported on their tax return, and proposed
an additional assessment of tax. We left messages on their voicemail on
November 18, 2014, and were able to speak to Mrs. [redacted] on November 21, 2014.
She could not recall whether or not they had received these benefits during the
2012 tax year. We explained that they had reported the income in 2011, as well
as 2013, and agreed to send the documentation to them for review. We mailed the
documentation to them later that day. On December 5, 2014 we spoke to Mrs. [redacted]
regarding the CP-2000 notice issued for their 2012 tax return. She informed us
that she believed that she had received the Social Security income, and we
asked that they sign the IRS form agreeing with the assessment, and return it
to us for submission to the IRS. We submitted the form agreeing with the
assessment to the IRS on December 16, 2014. We spoke with Mrs. [redacted] on January
6, 2015, regarding the proposed assessment and her wish for the case to be
completed by the end of that month. We informed her that the assessment was
still being processed by the IRS, and that their tax balances could not be
resolved in her requested time frame. We agreed to contact the IRS regarding
the assessment, and follow up with her the next day. On January 7, 2015, we
spoke to the IRS regarding the proposed assessment and were told that they had
received the signature form agreeing with the assessment on December 29th,
2014, and that it would take a minimum of 30 days to process. We updated Mrs.
[redacted] on our conversation with the IRS, and she asked that we contact the IRS
and provide her with an update on a weekly basis. We spoke to the IRS again on
January 14, 2015, and were told that the assessment was still processing. We
provided Mrs. [redacted] with an update, and she stated that she was having
difficulty paying our fees. We agreed to submit their case to our Client
Services Group to determine if fee consideration could be granted. We contacted
the IRS again on January 15, 2015, and ordered updated Account Transcripts to
confirm their balances. We contacted the IRS again on January 22, 2015, and
were informed that the assessment was still processing. We provided Mrs. [redacted]
with an update later that day. We mailed a letter to her on January 23, 2015,
reminding her of the April deadline to prepare their 2014 Federal 1040 Income
Tax Return. On January 30, 2015, we also spoke to Mrs. [redacted] regarding their
case, and her conversation with our Client Services Group. We spoke to Mrs.
[redacted] on February 4, 2015, and she asked that we contact the IRS to determine
whether the assessment had been processed. We spoke to the IRS and were
informed that it was still processing. We attempted to provide her with an
update later that day, and left a message on her voicemail. We called the IRS
again on February 11, 2015, and were told the assessment was still processing.
We attempted to update her on February 12, 2015, and left a message on her
voicemail. On February 13, 2015, we mailed a letter informing them about an
ongoing solicitation scam that our office had been made aware of, in which
individuals were impersonating the IRS, and calling taxpayers in an attempt to
gather personal and financial information from them. We left a message for Mr.
& Mrs. [redacted] on February 18, 2015, and received her latest pay statements on
February 24, 2015. On February 25, 2015, we spoke to Mrs. [redacted] regarding the
assessment, and confirmed that we had received the pay statements. On March 5,
2015, our accounting office notified us of a payment discrepancy on Mr. &
Mrs. [redacted]’s account. We contacted Mrs. [redacted] on March 6, 2015, and informed her
that we would not be able to resume work on their account until this was
rectified. We received a notice from the IRS on March 12, 2015, that they had
processed the 2012 assessment, and updated the current balances due which
totaled $56,035.28. We contacted Mr. & Mrs. [redacted] on April 1, 2015, but had
to leave a message on Mrs. [redacted]’s voicemail. Mrs. [redacted] contacted us on April 3,
2015, and we discussed the 2012 assessment, as well as her plan to complete the
2014 Federal 1040 Income Tax Return. We spoke again on April 7, 2015, and she
informed us that she had never received the case summary she had requested the
previous spring. We mailed an additional copy of the summary to her that day.
We spoke again on April 27, 2015, regarding their completed 2014 Federal 1040
Income Tax Return. On May 8, 2015, our accounting department notified us that
they had closed Mr. & Mrs. [redacted]'s case due to non-payment of monthly fees.
We revoked our Power of Attorney forms, and faxed them to the IRS on May 14,
2015. On May 18, 2015, we spoke to Mrs. [redacted] regarding the 2012 assessment, and
explained that we could not actively work on their case until they contacted
our accounting department to make payment arrangements. She stated that she
believed she could make a payment to our accounting department in June. Mrs.
[redacted] contacted us on August 4, 2015, regarding the status of their case. We
discussed the status of their account, and again explained that a payment would
need to be made before we could continue to work on their case. She stated that
she wanted us to continue work on the case, but did not know how she would pay
us for our services. We agreed to submit another request to our Client Services
Group to review the case and determine if any fee consideration could be
provided. On August 7, 2015, we were notified that their case remained closed
at that time, and that Mrs. [redacted] had requested an updated summary of the work
completed on their case. We prepared and mailed the case summary to Mrs. [redacted]
on August 10, 2015. On August 24, 2015, we were notified that Mrs. [redacted] stated
she had not received the case summary, and that she provided a new address
where she wanted the summary sent. The case summary was sent to the new address
that day. Additionally, the [redacted]s’ case was referred to our Client Services
Group on multiple occasions throughout the duration of their case to discuss
their concerns and look into potential fee consideration. The [redacted]s were
granted fee consideration of the August 2011 and September 2011 monthly fees
being waived in November 2011. Additionally, they agreed during another request
for fee assistance to waive the September 2013, October 2013 and November 2013
monthly fee. Then in September 2014, after the [redacted]s’ case was placed into a
non-working status, our Client Services Group granted the [redacted]s a fee deferment
of monthly fees for August 2014 and September 2014. Additionally, in October
2014, our Client Services Group agreed to reduce their monthly fee from $350 to
$300. Over the course of Mr. & Mrs. [redacted]’s case with our company, we
prevented them from having to communicate or negotiate directly with the IRS.
We also successfully prevented all further collection action from occurring. We
performed an extensive evaluation of their situation and discussed with them
resolution options based on provided information. Ultimately, we work hard to
resolve our client’s tax liabilities and concerns and take customer
satisfaction seriously. We would like nothing more than to resolve Mrs. [redacted]’s
concerns regarding his case and ask that he contact our office in order to
discuss this matter further. Mr. & Mrs. [redacted]’s account with our office was
placed into non-working status in March 2015 and they are aware of this fact.
They have not made any payments to our office since then and therefore we have
not actively worked the case. Their case was closed due to non-payment in May
2015 by our accounting department. If they would like us to resume work on the
case we are more than willing to do so. Unfortunately throughout the case, we
did run into communication problems with the clients at times. With limited
communication from the [redacted]s, it made it extremely difficult to resolve their
tax matter with the IRS. Additionally, there were many cases in which the
[redacted]s’ case was placed into a non-working status by our accounting department.
These frequent and at times lengthy periods of inactivity prolonged the case
and halted all progression the case team was making on working towards
resolving their liability. As we mentioned above, we worked hard internally
with the clients regarding their fees multiple times. We offered the breaks on
fees to the clients due to their financial problems that they expressed to us.
In good faith, we offered these fee arrangements to these clients so that we
could move forward and fix their tax problem. However, unfortunately, our
efforts still were unable to keep the clients on board with our office. We
would like nothing more than to resolve Mrs. [redacted]’s concerns regarding the
contract and the services we were providing. While it is unfortunate we could
not resolve this matter internally with the client, please be aware that the
attempts to do so were made. If the Revdex.com has suggestions for how we can resolve
this with the client we are certainly welcome those suggestions. If you require
any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for your time and
assistance with this matter. Sincerely

Dear [redacted]We are writing in response to the recent complaint filed against
our company regarding the fees paid and services rendered to [redacted]. **
[redacted] sought out and hired our services for administrative tax
representation.Wall & Associates has reached out to [redacted]...

[redacted] in
regards to his concerns and have spoken with him. Our office is awaiting the
return of a letter in which we request his signature declaring the matter
solved. This will be forwarded to the Revdex.com serving Central Virginia on receipt.If you required any further information, please contact our office.
Thank you for your time and assistance with this matter.

Dear [redacted],We are writing in timely response to the above referenced complaint received by our office on November 18, 2014 (copy enclosed). [redacted] sought out and hired our services in October 2012 for administrative tax representation. The case team rapidly acted...

on[redacted]’s case upon receipt and ideally began working towards resolving the tax liability. Upon receipt of [redacted]k & [redacted] case for administrative tax resolution on October 31, 2012, we contacted [redacted] father, [redacted] and [redacted]k by phoneand E-mail correspondence that day to introduce the case team and discuss the background of the tax matter. Mr. [redacted] was incarcerated at the beginning of the case which he left his father Mr. [redacted] with [redacted] over his affa[redacted]. On November 1, 2012, we attempted to contact the [redacted] to verify the account balances, however, the [redacted]s we had received were incorrect and we were unable to verify the information with the [redacted] at that time. We then contacted [redacted]k and were able to verify her [redacted] but were advised we would need to contact [redacted] father to verify his information. We also scheduled two calls with [redacted]k for November 5, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. PST to go over her and [redacted] current financial situation and the following Monday, November 12, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. PST to discuss what our case plan would be for them moving forward toward resolution of the tax liabilities. After rescheduling the f[redacted]t conference call at [redacted] request we were able to speak with her on November 12, 2012, and during the call we discussed her financials in detail in order to help us move forward with a case plan. We discussed with her the importance of becoming and staying compliant with [redacted] in orderto move towards a final resolution as well as her husband’s situation at that time. We also rescheduled the second conference call per the client’s request to November 23, 2012 at 11:00a.m. PST. On November 13, 2012, correct [redacted] forms were filed with the [redacted] that notified the taxing authorities of our representation. The [redacted] was also contacted that day for [redacted] and it was determined that there was an outstanding balance that totaled$57,982.44 for tax years 2008, 2009 and 2011. [redacted] account records and wage information were also requested at that time. On November 14, 2012, we received [redacted] signed [redacted] Forms which were immediately filed with the [redacted]. We then contacted the [redacted] on his behalf and it was determined that there was an outstanding balance that totaled $619.02 for tax year 2009. It was also concluded that there were unfiled tax returns for tax years 2006 and 2007 both of which the [redacted] was showing that he was required to file. [redacted] account records and wage information were also requested from the [redacted] in order to assist in with the needed tax preparation. November 20, 2012, we received an E-mail from [redacted] that asked us to once again reschedule our conference call set for November 23, 2012 due to her hectic work schedule. We responded immediately that we would be more than happy to reschedule the call again and it was mutually agreed upon to reschedule for November 27, 2012 at 11 a.m. PST.Upon calling [redacted] for our scheduled call on November 27, 2012, she again requested that we reschedule the call for the next day, November 28, 2012 at the same time. We again complied with her request and agreed to change the date of the call once again. We were finally able to speak with [redacted] on November 28, 2012 and we discussed the work completed thus far on her behalf and also addressed her concerns with the length of time we had her caseand the many complications she was experiencing keeping our scheduled conference calls due to her busy work schedule. Then on November 29, 2012, we received notification from our accounting office that the account was placed into non-working status due to payment discrepancies on their account. We attempted to reach [redacted] that day to discuss the non-working status of her account and had to leave a message. December 4, 2012, we received E-mail correspondence from [redacted] that expressed concerns with the notification she had received from our accounting office as well as the work that had been completed on her case. We attempted to contact [redacted] by phone immediately to discuss these issues with her but had to leave another message. We tried to contact her again later that day but had to leave a second message before receiving a return call with instructions to contact her between the hours of 10:00 a.m. PST and 10:50 a.m. PST on December 6, 2012. We complied with her request and were able to get her in touch with our accounting office per her request so that she could make payment arrangements. We received notification from accounting on December 18, 2012 that [redacted]’s accounting discrepancy had been resolved and her account was returned to active status. On January 3, 2013, we received further E-mail correspondence from [redacted] regarding questions related to her case and that advised us that due to health complications with her pregnancy, she was having a hard time gathering the documentation we needed to moveforward with her case. In response, we again attempted to contact her by phone to discuss her case in detail and had to leave a message for her on her voicemail. [redacted] responded to our phone call with additional E-mail correspondence on January 4, 2013, that stated she would like to correspond by E-mail if possible due to her young child making it difficult to speak on the phone. We responded and explained to her that due to the sensitive and complicated issues involved with resolution of a tax matter that we would need to speak with her via telephone at times. We then mutually agreed upon scheduling a call to discuss the case the following Monday, January 7, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. PST. 
We contacted [redacted] at the scheduled time on January 7, 2013 and explained to her in detail the status of her case and the plan for moving forward. We also addressed all of her questions and concerns regarding the timeframe of the case up to that point. [redacted] also requested that we again provide a list of documentation required to prepare her financial statement. We then mailed a follow up letter regarding the conversation and also included copies of written correspondence previously sent on November 12, 2012 and November 14, 2012. Throughout the remainder of January, we received part of the financial information we had requested. We also contacted the [redacted] to continue holding off aggressive collection action while the client continued to gather the rest of the information. Then on February 4, 2013, we attempted to reach [redacted] in response to an Email inquiry she had sent regarding the status of her account but had to leave a message. We spoke to [redacted] father on February 15, 2013, and advised him we had been able to keep aggressive collection action at bay while working towards having the account placed into a [redacted] status. On February 20, 2013, after not hearing back from [redacted] regarding the message left in response to her E-mail on February 4, 2013, we sent a follow up E-mail that advised her that we had been trying to reach her. Our E-mail correspondence also requested that she review the financial statement we had prepared and to provide us with an update concerning the additional financial information previously requested. She responded to our email that she had the [redacted] and [redacted] Statement ready and would send it to us later that day. She also stated that her 2013 tax return would be completed on March 1, 2013. Then on February 25, 2013, [redacted] supplied a letter to our office which she had addressed to the [redacted] which included an overview of what had happened over the past few years surrounding the tax debt. Throughout the month of March 2013, we corresponded with [redacted] multipletimes by E-mail and once by phone in regards to the [redacted] had received from the [redacted] for tax year 2011. The notice was in regards to [redacted] unemployment income that had been omitted from the tax return. After carefully reviewing thereturn in comparison to the wage and income we received from the [redacted], it was concluded that the additional tax assessed was correct. We advised them that we could include the additional tax assessment owed in her resolution moving forward.April 2013 was spent preparing the [redacted] documentation. We then sent the documentation to [redacted] to review and sign who notified us of changes in her living situation. We reviewed the changes and determined it would not affect the Offer inCompromise negatively and asked her to send us updated financials regarding the changes or to make the changes directly to the paperwork she had and return it to our office. She also informed us she was making her Estimated Tax Payments to maintain compliance for the current tax year to prevent the accrual of additional tax debt. [redacted] returned the [redacted] documents to our office in May 2013 and expressed further concern regarding the length of her case. We attempted to reach her by phone and then E-mailed her to let her know that we wanted to address her concerns and help her better understand the status of her case and what to expect next. We requested she return our call at her earliest convenience. We then prepared and mailed the [redacted]documents to the [redacted] for processing on their behalf. We did not receive a response from [redacted] until June 10, 2013, at which time we were advised that [redacted] was out of jail and would now be the primary point of contact for the case. We then spoke to [redacted] a couple of times throughout the remainder of the month and brought him up to date on the status of the case. We followed up with the Offer in Compromise Unit during the month of July 2013 to ensure it is processed as timely as possible and receive an update on the status. We then spoke with [redacted] provided him with an update and explained the Offer in Compromise process to him. Throughout August and September of 2013 we attempted to reach [redacted] to touch base with him and were unable to do so. We followed up with him by E-mail correspondence. We also followed up with the recently assigned Offer Examiner to obtain an update on the status of the review and left messages for her as well. October 11, 2013, we spoke to [redacted] regarding notices he had received from the[redacted] and explained the status of the Offer. On October 29, 2013, we were able to speak with the Offer Examiner who advised us of additional documentation needed for the review and consideration of the Offer and gave us a deadline of November 11, 2013 to provide this information. We attempted to call [redacted] the following day to go over the list of documentation required but had to leave a message. We then followed up with E-mail correspondence to [redacted] as well. November 4, 2013, we prepared and sent the client a detailed list of all additional information the Offer Examiner was requesting including the date it was needed by. We corresponded throughout the next couple of weeks and received the information requested on the deadline date of November 11, 2013. We immediately prepared the information and sent it to the Offer Examiner for review and consideration. On November 21, 2013, we spoke to the Offer Examiner who advised us that upon review of the information provided she was going to send out her preliminary findings that indicated that per her calculations the taxpayers’ could full pay the liability. December 2013 was spent reviewing the Offer in Compromisepreliminary analysis received from the Offer Examiner and working to solidify an appeal to dispute her preliminary decision to reject the Offer. We attempted to contact [redacted] or [redacted] regarding our findings on December 30, 2013 and were able to speak to [redacted] on December 31, 2013. On January 20, 2014, we spoke with [redacted] who advised us of some changes to his financial situation. We requested updated statements reflecting those changes once he received them. He advised us he would send them once he received them. In February 2014, we received the official rejection notice dated January 28, 2014 from the Offer Examiner. We then began immediately preparing the appeal which was submitted to the Offer Examiner via facsimile on February 26, 2014. On March 19, 2014, the Offer Examiner responded to our appeal and advised us that she had made the changes requested and would send us her updated calculations still showing ability to pay. Additionally, we were notified that the OIC appeal request had been forwarded to the appeals department. During the months of April 2014 and May 2014, our office reviewed the examiners calculations, the appeal and prepared for the upcoming Appeals Hearing. We then received correspondence from the [redacted] Appeals Unit that the OIC appeal hadbeen scheduled for May 28, 2014. During the month of May 2014, we spoke with [redacted] and advised him of the financial information needed for the upcoming appeal and the deadline date we needed it by in order to comply with the hearing date of May 28, 2014. We held the appeal on May 28, 2014 and due to the fact that our office did not receive all of the documentation requested nor provide anything to the appeals examiner, the Offer in Compromise rejection was sustained. We then followed up with [redacted] following the hearing and explained what happened during the call. During the months of June 2014 and July 2014 we attempted to reach [redacted] and [redacted] both numerous times to discuss the status of the case and to review the timeline of events leading up to the rejection of the Offer in Compromise but had to leave messages each time. In the month of August 2014 we were finally able to speak with [redacted] who expressed concern with what happened during the Offer in Compromise Rejection Appeals Hearing. During our conversation, we discussed the timeline of events with her in detail that led to the final decision being made. Her case was then forwarded to our Client Services Group discuss the concerns she expressed and they agreed to grant fee consideration for the client.During the months of September and October 2014 we attempted to reach the client by both telephone and e-mail correspondence with no response. We then received notification from our accounting office on November 6, 2014 that the account was placed into non-working status due to a payment discrepancy. We understand [redacted] frustrations regarding her case. Throughout the duration of the case, our office maintained consistent communication with the [redacted] and [redacted] and [redacted] regarding their case status. However at times it is critical to discuss case planning and other actions taking on the place via telephone conversation. This ensures that everyone is in agreement and thoroughly understands on the current status of the case.[redacted]’s comments regarding the Original Offer in Compromise amount of $100 require further clarification by our office. The majority of the Offers we submit are for $100 or less. The [redacted] openly states in their policies that they do not base their decisions on Offers on the Offer amount. Furthermore, each year we have nearly 200 Offers in Compromise settled with the [redacted] for $100 or less. In fact, we have had several Offers settled for only $1. Offer amounts can easily be negotiated once the Offer is reviewed by the [redacted]. If the [redacted] recommends an increased Offer amount they will do so. Unfortunately the clients’ Offer in Compromise was rejected due to our office nor the [redacted] receiving the required documentationfor the appeal. Additionally, through our experience with the [redacted] on a majority of the Offer in Compromise’s submitted are initially denied. Tax personnel are government employees who typically view tax accounts as established debts, to be paid as quickly as possible. Taxes will not be adjusted downward or levies released, without solid reasons. The process of convincing tax collection personnel to adjust a tax account requires detailed records of the taxpayer’sfinances. Moreover, during the Offer in Compromise process, we are given short deadlines to provide information to the examiners reviewing the case. We understands [redacted]’s frustration when it comes to this. It is just as frustrating to us having a very short timeframe to get all of the documentation required and submitted for the examiner’s review. We have worked very hard on this case for the time we have represented [redacted] and [redacted]. We have kept aggressive collection action by the [redacted] at bay. Additionally,have worked towards planning for resolution of the tax matter as a whole. We would like to move forward with the resolution of [redacted]’s and [redacted]’s case as there is still work to be completed to resolve his tax matters. We would be glad to discuss the case further and the work that was performed on his behalf. We are also open to discuss the possibility of further fee consideration and request that they contact our office directly.If you require any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for your time and assistance with this matter.
Sincerely, 
[redacted]
?

Dear Ms. [redacted], We are writing in response to the recent
complaint filed against our company regarding the fees paid and services
rendered to Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] sought out and hired our services in
May of 2015 for administrative tax representation. Mr. [redacted] raises several
additional concerns in his follow up response that I will address. Mr. [redacted]
states correctly that our office submitted an offer for $100. We apologize if
this does not make sense to Mr. [redacted], but our office has over 30 years of
experience in resolving tax controversies and this method is employed by our
office to ensure that our clients receive the best outcome for their cases. Upon
submission of an offer to the IRS a 20% down payment is required. In accepting
an offer the IRS will allow a taxpayer the opportunity to pay in any additional
amount to meet that 20% requirement prior to official acceptance. If our office
had submitted an offer for $10,000 dollars instead of $100. Mr. [redacted] would
have had to submit a down payment that was $1,980 more for a result that would
not have changed. IRS offers are reviewed based on a taxpayer’s financial
situation, not on the offer amount. Offering more does not change the overall
outcome. Our office was in contact with the offer examiner for his case prior
to the official rejection notice. Mr. [redacted] received notification of the
official denial in the mail. Our office knew of the denial three weeks
beforehand because we were communicating with the offer examiner in an attempt
to get his offer accepted. Mr. [redacted] was informed of the rejection on March 15,
2016 because we spoke with the offer examiner on March 11, 2016. The official
rejection was sent out after that in early April. You cannot file an appeal
without the offer rejection letter because it includes the financial tables on
which you base the appeal.Wall& Associates, Inc. employees did not lie to **
[redacted]. He hired us to represent him before the IRS and to take a position that
would result in the highest likelihood for a successful resolution. Our office
did that.Wall & Associates, Inc. would like to reiterate that our
office would never delay a case in order to collect a monthly fee. Our case
teams are incentivized to resolve cases correctly and quickly. They are not incentivized
to hold cases open.Our office does full out forms that are readily available. We
follow IRS procedures and rules the forms don’t change. When you hired Wall
& Associates, Inc. you are hired our experience in addressing your tax
controversy and hiring out investigative abilities in reviewing your case for the
best resolution. Unfortunately, our office cannot offer an additional refund
due to the nature and work on the case. We remain open to our original offer at
this time. I encourage [redacted] to contact us directly with additional questions
he may have. If you require any further information, please contact our office.
Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer 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.After carful consideration of your offer my husband and I decided to meet you where we feel it is fair. Thank you for being more workable as your last two offers remained the same. [redacted] and I would be satisfied with a $2000 refund. I emailed my attorney tonight because I was not sure if she submitted a letter to you yet. If she has please disregard if you agree. I will ask her to refrain from anymore correspondence.
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear [redacted],We are writing in timely response to the above referenced complaint received on November 7, 2014 (copy enclosed). We are sorry to hear that our previous response and offer to look into and discuss the possibility of fee consideration with the client did not resolve [redacted]...

[redacted] concerns.[redacted] additional comments state that we offered to waive further payments; however, our previous response only indicated that we would be willing to look into fee consideration and discuss potential options with the client. We did not specify in the previous response any type of consideration we were willing to offer. We realize the stress the [redacted] can cause for our clients, and that our clients all want a fast and immediate resolution to the issue. Unfortunately, we can not provide a guaranteed timeframe to any client as to when their tax problem will have a final fix. We do though work hard to move case issues as quickly as we can and to work towards the best possible outcome for our clients.We have worked diligently on resolving her case and did the necessary case planning to get to the point for a submission of a viable Offer in Compromise. Furthermore, we negotiated with the original Offer Examiner and filed an Appeal which is currently being reviewed by the Settlement Officer.We are committed to resolving this issue with [redacted] and we want to see her Offer in Compromise through to acceptance by the [redacted]. At this time we are willing to offer [redacted] a refund of her the September, October, and November 2014 monthly fees and we will also cap her fee at that time. This would mean [redacted] will no longer be charged monthly fees by our office. We are offering this to show our commitment to excellent customer service and to resolve a customer concern. We work hard to please all of our clients and we hope to do so in this situation as well.As always, please contact our office if any further information is required. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

After talking to a wall and associates rep last  week about a rufund of my money. I was told I would have a response by last friday. I never heard back from the rep or anyone else. After making several phones calls and leaving many voice messages I still haven't heard back. Person I spoke to was Bernie. I cannot recall the last name. I would like to thank the Revdex.com for taking the time to hear my case and hope we can reach a successful conclusion. Thank You.

Dear [redacted],
We are writing in timely response to the additional comments made by [redacted] and received on June 24,2014 (copy enclosed). It is unfortunate that [redacted] refuse to try to understand the work we completed on this serious tax matter. Their belief is that simply because their tax bill has not been reduced greatly, we have therefore done no work for them. This is simply untrue.
Tax resolution takes a great deal of review, analysis and planning, all of which we did on the [redacted] behalves. In our previous responses, we have provided detailed accounts of the phone conversations our office held with [redacted] over the course of the case to discuss how to resolve the tax matter.
Additionally, [redacted] filed a complaint with the North Carolina Attorney General's Office. Our corporate legal counsel responded appropriately and timely to that compliant. While we are working diligently to address their concerns, [redacted] are not seeing the work that the case team has performed on their behalf to work on resolving their extensive tax matters.
We also would like to again address the specific complaints by [redacted] in the Revdex.com Complaint received June 9, 2014. Per our conversation with the IRS and Tax Examiner [redacted], we were advised that the information [redacted] provided previous to our representation was insufficient and created a tax delinquency. We had requested additional information from the clients in order to properly argue the assessment by [redacted] per the wishes of [redacted]. In May of 2014 [redacted] eluded to the fact that they had additional information and would be sending it. Once this information would have been received'we would have forwarded this to [redacted] in order to argue the liability. Unfortunately, without this information we have little to argue on the liability that the IRS is assessing. The first occasion in which [redacted] spoke with [redacted] was on May 8th, 2014. During that conversation she explained the case in detail to [redacted] as we had previously been told not to correspond with her per her husband. She agreed to send an E-mail to [redacted] when work was performed regarding the case and current audit. We again were not able to provide anything to [redacted] as it was not provided by the clients. In no point during that conversation did [redacted] advise [redacted] that nothing had been done on the case. The case was actually thoroughly discussed with [redacted] in regards to the examination and case progress. [redacted] did state to [redacted] that if they are unable to provide us the necessary documentation proving the expenses claimed on the tax return it will be unlikely that the IRS will lower the balance owed through the audit. Weekly updates were not discussed as the team knew that they needed information from [redacted] to argue the assessment and would not have a detailed update until they provided this information. When dealing with taxpayers that owe the IRS or State Department back taxes we do not make it a habit to leave messages or speak with unauthorized individuals. This is the reason no voicemail was left for [redacted] at her school. We would have left a message for her had it been her personal voicemail. Had the secretary answered the phone and not an automated system we would have left a general message for [redacted] to return our call. We did respond to her Email immediately after and spoke with her husband. Please be aware that per the Notice of Deficiency dated April 9,2014 the deadline to petition tax court is July 8,2014 and we have advised [redacted] that we can provide additional information to [redacted] prior to that date. Again. to date we have received no additional information from the clients in order to argue this assessment.
Additionally, [redacted] claim that they "spoke with the IRS last week and their employee [redacted] told my wife that the IRS has no record of them ever calling regarding us." Wall and Associates, Inc. worked with different IRS employees over the tetm of the agreement. Fufthermore, employees working on the case coordinated with the collection officer about the extent of the taxes claimed due, problems with the Loftus tax returns, particularly deductions, and planned enforcement if there was no progress. The authorized representatives on the IRS Forms 2848 and 8821 are the individuals who are working on the case as they are eligible to discuss client cases with the IRS. Therefore asking about the business name would not provide the detailed documentation of the correspondences made between those individuals and the IRS.
Unfortunately, given the fact that we work with the lnternal Revenue Service regarding serious tax matters, we cannot provide guarantees to any client that their case will resolve in a specific way. Just as any doctor cannot guarantee cures for any medical ailment. We did the necessary work to provide input as to the appropriate case planning techniques and overall case plan to [redacted].
We have worked very hard on this case and there is still work to be done towards resolving the matter. While it is unfortunate we could not resolve this matter internally with the clients, please be aware that the attempts to do so were made. If the Revdex.com has suggestions for how we can resolve this with the clients we are certainly welcome those suggestions.
At this time, we request this matter be closed administratively with the Revdex.com due to the fact that the clients have escalated their complaints to the North Carolina Attorney General's office and that matter is currently pending.
If you require any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for you time and assistance with this matter.
Sincerely,
Wall & Associates
[redacted]
Director of Public Relations

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted] They offer to pay us $500.00. They are trying to come up with all sorts of things to make it seem as if they were doing what we had asked of them. It is not true. [redacted]s also had agreed to send us a summery of our last discussion and she failed to do that as well. I am not going to allow them to steel $5000.00 for something they had no way of doing in the first place. She keeps acting as if It is a misunderstanding. Not so. We were lied to to get our money for promises from [redacted] that could not be kept. I now have been contacted 4 times by IRS which is exactly what I was told would not happen. It seems that they really like to set people up. It would be good business practice to return some ones money when they can't provide the services promised.
I will not stop bank dispute.
These people surely know that [redacted] has misrepresented their company and should return my money. They pray on people needing help then rip them off.
[redacted]

Dear Mrs. [redacted], We are writing in timely response to the
additional comments received for the above referenced complaint on July 8, 2015
(copy [redacted]). We again would like to thank the Revdex.com office for their continued
efforts and assistance with working to resolve Ms. [redacted]’s concerns. Please
know that we would like nothing more than to resolve Ms. [redacted]’s concerns. We
do wish to take further action in this case so that we can amicably resolve
this matter with the client. We are sorry to hear that our most recent response
to Ms. [redacted]’s complaint did not resolve her concerns. While it is our
continued understanding that Ms. [redacted] would like a full refund we have
previously offered refunds to her in hopes rectifying the complaint and moving
on. We have offered these refunds not due to an admission of liability to Ms.
[redacted] as we worked the case appropriately. To continue efforts to resolve this
matter we will now offer to refund $3,850 which is more than 70% of the funds
she paid to our office for the services rendered. We will be able to move
forward with this process as soon as Ms. [redacted] decides to accept the refund and
notifies our office. We make this offer not as an admission of liability to the
client, but only to resolve any complaint or misunderstanding. If Ms. [redacted]
does not accept this refund offer we would like to request the assistance of
your Dispute Resolution Center for mediation and/or arbitration, or any other
remedy that can help in this matter. We take complaints from clients seriously
and we work hard to resolve each of them. Whatever we can do in this case to
resolve the matter is in our best interest as well as Ms. [redacted]’s. If you
require any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for your
continued time and assistance with this matter.

[redacted], I have dealt with Walls and Associates for a long time now and I'm just ready for this all to be over. I will settle for the $3850, I don't won't to go into Abritration. [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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 writing in response to Wall & Associates reply
regarding my dispute of them handling my tax debt as they were hired to do. My
complaint is still as it was. When I hired the company it was my understanding
they could assist me in getting my tax debt resolved in a very timely manner. I
paid them the amount they asked me to pay up front and they continued to
collect 800 dollars a month from my account as they “worked” to resolve my
issue. I was expecting resolution with the IRS through them within a reasonable
amount of time and was not able to get that. Did they file the necessary
paperwork they stated they did, most likely so. Did they file the paper work
with the IRS knowing FULL WELL that I did not qualify for was a tax reduction as
they stated they were going to try to get me ??? ABSOLUTELY they did. Wall
& Associates are the professionals and although they were very
unprofessional and in my eyes unethical is collecting unnecessary money from
me, they certainly know the IRS laws or they would not have “followed” the
process. Knowing the laws I feel they also should have been HONEST with me from
the very beginning and let me know that my income did not allow for me to have
a tax reduction or anything else they filled papers out for and simply go to
making arrangements with the IRS for a payment plan.They did not do this
because this would have cut their profit margin down greatly. Since the IRS
decided to take action and put a request in for wage garnishment and a levy on
my home I have worked with the IRS directly. I was able to stop the garnishment
and the levy, not Wall and Associates. In fact I am the one who notified Wall
and Associates this was happening not them letting me know. Wasn’t this what I
was paying them to do to represent me? To find resolution and stop the levy and
garnishment from happening? When I call them and state the garnishment was
requested they said that it was part of the process and they would once again
fill the paperwork out to have it stopped. Once again, another form another
stall tactic so they could make more money off me. Money that could have been
paid to the IRS over the past two years. Wall and Associates did not in any way
help me come to an agreement on payments with the IRS, they manipulated me and
took advantage of my checking account every month until I put a stop to it. I
have done my research since termination of services with this company and I
have discovered they have many complaints the same nature as mine. This tells
me that Wall & Associates make it a practice to be manipulative, and
dishonest and do what is right for them not the client. So, with that said I
decline their offer of finishing the process with me as I have done that
myself. Ironically it took me ONE phone call to the IRS directly stating I had
been working with a company that got me to the point of garnishment and I was
more than willing to make payment arrangements with them which immediately
stopped the garnishment and ONE set of forms to fill out to make the payment
arrangements. The rep I spoke to was very helpful and sympathetic that I had
been through this nightmare with your company and stated that all too often he
sees things like this happen. Perhaps going forward you could advise those
clients that you truly can’t help and can only do stall tactics with the intent
of personal financial gain, as this is all you really ever did for me. I
believe your company owes me all of my money back because you willfully and
knowingly continued to collect your monthly payment knowing the end results
would not be in my favor but in yours. Knowing that all you were doing was
keeping the IRS at an arms length so you could collect more. Knowing the end
results would be exactly as it was.
 
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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 If your company is so concerned with pleasing their clients they would agree to refund my money.  How many future customers would like to go through what I have been through? 
How many clients or future clients would look at this as a favorable experience? My reason for stopping payment at certain times throughout the tenure was because of my frustration with the lack of progress on my case. I am now working with the Irs on my own this is exactly what I paid you the money to do!  
When I visited the local IS office they were quite frustrated with the lack of continuity with tax resolution.  
I am currently working with them to resolve my tax issues and I guarantee that this will be resolved before the end of 2015. FEBRUARY 2016 would be 5 years with WALL!
I am sure if you look through the files you will see that I contacted you many times throughout the tenure frustrated and upset to the point of tears with what was going on.
Ii finally reached the point where I just couldn't do it anymore. ..or afford to continue.
I feel that what you did for me is not worth $15,000!!!
I  will continue to work with the IRS. on my behalf.  If anything. .you keep the $300 for all your hard work and refund me the rest of my  money. 
Added note: The person I met with was indeed the vice president of Sales for Wall in this region.  HE WAS ON LINKEDIN and I recognized him. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Re: [redacted], Douglas Case # [redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted], 
We are writing in response to the above referenced complaint received on November 9th 2015 (copy enclosed). In our response dated November 16, our office responded to the aforementioned complaint and informed the Revdex.com of our...

intention to attempt to address this matter internally before directly addressing the complaint with them. On November 18, 2015, our office contacted Mr. [redacted] and in response to that phone call a follow-up call was scheduled for November 20, 2015. At that time Mr. [redacted] and Wall & Associates, Inc. came to a mutually beneficial arrangement that satisfied both parties. Our office now considers this matter closed and we request that this complaint now be moved to the resolved category. If you require any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter. 
Sincerely, Wall & Associates Inc. 
By: Brian G[redacted], Public Relations Department

RE: Ms. [redacted], Revdex.com Case #: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted], We are writing in timely response to the above referenced complaint received on April 11, 2016 (copy enclosed). This complaint is in reference to our client Ms. [redacted]. Ms. [redacted], signed up for tax representation services regarding the Internal Revenue Service and the state of Mississippi on March 25, 2015. A case summary through April 11, 2016 has been enclosed for her records. In her complaint Ms. [redacted] brings up several issues I would like to address. Ms. [redacted] came to Wall & Associates, Inc. owing a substantial balance to the IRS. The monthly required maintenance fees that Wall & Associates, Inc. charges are based on the amount of work that will need to go into a case. Clients with larger balances are naturally going to require more work to resolve successfully. Our associates quote fees during the initial consultation that they believe will cover the amount of work that would need to go into a case, but may need to modify this amount if the amount owed differs from what is reported to them in the initial consultation by our clients. Our clients will then sign a contract based on the agreed upon amount. The original signed contract does state a $350 monthly fee .as being required for our services. While our office cannot say for certain what actions the IRS will or will not take on a case I can state with confidence that unless you are handling yourself in a fraudulent manner with the IRS the risk of arrest is almost non-existent. Here recently there have been a recurrence of IRS Scam calls with individuals threatening arrest if a payment is not made to them, this is not the IRS and is being perpetrated illegally by various individuals. Having reviewed her case, in detail, Ms. [redacted] is clearly not perpetrating fraud so she doesn't have to worry about the IRS arresting her. In a similar fashion, I cannot state for certain what actions the IRS will or will not take against personal property, but generally they will not seize the primary residence of a taxpayer, unless again, fraud is involved. I can say with certainty that the IRS is not allowed to seize anything while a good faith Offer-In-Compromise has been presented to them and is under review. This is currently the case with Ms. [redacted]. This does not stop the IRS from considering the equity in the property as part of the terms of any accepted Offer-in-Compromise, but that is not a seizure. Our office is currently working an offer appeal for Ms. [redacted] and that right now that is our primary concern regarding her case. She has been in contact with the case team and needs to continue to do so. Previously she requested copies of correspondence that we sent to the IRS on her behalf be sent to her, this was done. If you require any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for your time and assistance with this matter.

we have had a problem with is Company ( Wall & Associate) for a while now , this is a follow up with the case #[redacted] that was just close , my respond to wall and Assoc. last offer was declined due to the amount that was offer , they Own us $3200.00 for a job that was not perform in our behalf . we were told by the IRS there was no record of them being in contact with the IRS, this was something the Company had made up to make them self look good in the Consumer eyes. there offer has been nothing we have asking for, they started off by offering $500.00 then $1600.00 last was $2000.00.by offering this amount is just admitting there wrong . in not handling our case properly.we would like that the case be reevaluate. And keep this case open. we believe that the consumer need to no actually what we are dealing with.
Were asking this Company to pay us back what we paid them $3200.00 and nothing less

Dear Ms. [redacted], We are writing in response to the complaint filed against our company regarding the fees paid and services rendered to Mr. [redacted]. We want to help Mr. [redacted] through his current financial situation, and help him resolve his outstanding IRS tax balance. Our Client Services Group has spoken with Mr. [redacted] and we have come to a mutually beneficial arrangement to continue active work on his case. If you require any further information, please contact our office. Thank you for your time and assistance with this matter. Sincerely, Wall & Associates, Inc.