CaféAuLait
This Space for Rent
- Thread starter
- #101
CaféAuLait;9043220 said:it is no different
she has had years to solve the problem
before it came to this
and it isnt like she loses out completely
she will receive 106 thousand dollars in the end
She is losing out big time IMO. She is getting a third of her home value at 280k.
I'm confused why you said she "had years to solve the problem". She has been fighting over this for years. The county auctioned her home in 2011- less than a year after she paid her taxes in 2010 with a receipt stating paid in full.
the problems arise in 2008 2009 and 2010
there never was a notice "paid in full"
in fact she was sent letters of remaining balances
in 2009 she was sent notice that she had a remaining balance of 6.30
plus postage and costs total 28.25
then in 2010 she had delinquent taxes once again for 2009
county tax was 1184.37 and a 118.44 penalty
school District tax was 2,324 and a 116.09 penalty
on 6/3/ 2010 the tax claim bureau notified her that she owed 3,832.71 for her 2009 real estate taxes
on 7/2/2010 the Bureau sent a certified notice to her that added interest raising the total to 3,990.03.
On 9/ 11/ 2010, the bureau received a check from her in the amount of 3,990.03
which was applied to her 2009 county and school taxes
leaving a balance from the prior year of 234.72
the issue really is due process case
the appeals court returned the case to the lower court
for evidence
I know I said when she paid her taxes in 2010. I did not say they were her 2010 taxes. She paid her 2009 taxes in 2010 when they were due, although late. She did get a receipt paid in full. She ASSUMED when she got her 2009 tax bill, any late penalties had been carried over to 2009 from 2008. When she paid the 2009 taxes which were due in 2010, she thought she was paid in full because that. That is why the lower court said she was not given due process.