C-store owner has $107K seized by IRS 'cause he made cash deposits

[midnight rambler]

Good fucking grief, they don't have anything better to do than harass someone doing nothing wrong??


Though he didn’t know it at the time, McLellan committed structuring violations when making cash deposits of less than $10,000.
McLellan himself doesn’t handle the deposits—that’s his niece’s responsibility—and a bank teller had previously advised her to make deposits of less than that amount.* If cash deposits totaled more than $10,000, the bank had to file additional paperwork, the teller said.



*so bank teller advised his niece to 'break the law'

Some interesting details at the link.

http://dailysignal.com/2015/05/11/the-irs-seized-107000-from-this-north-carolina-mans-bank-account-now-hes-fighting-to-get-it-back/

[midnight rambler]

From here on out I betcha this fellow buries his cash in a coffee can in his backyard.

[Twisted Titan]

From here on out I betcha this fellow buries his cash in a coffee can in his backyard.

Its dam sure safer.

[midnight rambler]

bank teller advised his niece to 'break the law'

If I were him I'd be thinking real hard about suing the bank because:

A bank employee gave his niece bad *legal advice* which resulted in scrutiny (for doing something with definitely isn't criminal)

AND

the bank merrily turned over his cash to the Individuals Representing Satan WITHOUT HIS PERMISSION and WITHOUT NOTIFYING HIM THEY WERE THERE, and I seriously doubt they had a warrant signed by a judge to do so

[Twisted Titan]

Who has got the money to persue a case. Like that in the beast system?


The best thing he can do is make yt vid and hope it goes viral.

[ximmy]

Who has got the money to persue a case. Like that in the beast system?


The best thing he can do is make yt vid and hope it goes viral.

Facing Intense Pressure, IRS Drops Civil Forfeiture Case in North Carolina: "Government Moves To Return $107,000 Seized From Innocent Small Business Owner; Refuses To Pay Interest Or Attorney Fees"


Description:
Arlington, Va.—Two months ago, U.S. Attorney Steve West told Lyndon McLellan that any attempt to garner publicity about his civil forfeiture case “doesn't help. It just ratchets up feelings in the agency. My offer is to return 50% of the money.”

Yesterday, just two weeks after the Institute for Justice took on the case and brought it to the attention of the nation, the IRS and Department of Justice moved to voluntarily dismiss the case and give Lyndon back 100% of his hard-earned money.

“I'm relieved to be getting my money back,” said Lyndon McLellan. "What’s wrong is wrong, and what the government did here is wrong. I just hope that by standing up for what’s right, it means this won’t happen to other people.”
Even after he recovers his bank account, Lyndon is still out tens of thousands of dollars, thanks to the government’s actions. Lyndon paid a $3,000 retainer to a private attorney before IJ took the case on pro bono, and he also paid approximately $19,000 for an accountant to audit his business and to provide other services to help convince the government he did nothing wrong. The government is refusing to pay those expenses. And the government also is refusing to pay interest on the money.

http://xrepublic.tv/node/13231

[Dogman]

The ass hats caused the problem, but not pay the fees that their actions stared!

The victim should stay on the mountain top screaming his eyeballs out to the media, because it helps show the arrogance of the gov actors! Bet if the publicity is great enough, the gov will pay the fees, but only if the spotlight stays on them, they are like cockroaches, they avoid the light!

;)

[madfranks]

I just hope that by standing up for what’s right, it means this won’t happen to other people.

You'd think after receiving such a potent dose of reality he'd refrain from making such naive comments.

[Serpo]

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002823991/555737637_looting_answer_4_xlarge.jpeg

[Glass]

From a local story published in the last few days. Mr Kizon has a colourful background. He was involved in some nefarious things and was labelled tongue in cheek as a "Local Business Identity".

But the situation is the same. They simply took his money prior to conviction. Against the law. I think he has cause for private Tort action. Referring to the last sentence in the article.


Kizon and Mansfield win $10m DPP payout

Perth businessmen John Kizon and Nigel Mansfield are set to pocket millions of dollars each in taxpayer-funded compensation after a 13-year legal battle with the Director of Public Prosecutions was settled yesterday.

Just weeks before a Supreme Court civil trial was due to hear Mr Mansfield's claim for millions of dollars in costs and compensation over a freezing order placed on his assets in 2002, lawyers reached a confidential settlement.

Neither side would confirm exactly how much the settlement was worth but _The West Australian _ believes it will mean a payout of more than $10 million to Mr Mansfield, who under previous agreements will have to pay a significant portion of the money to Mr Kizon.

The agreement brings to an end more than a decade of legal wrangling over State prosecutors using WA's criminal property confiscation laws to freeze Mr Mansfield's assets during an Australian Crime Commission investigation, codenamed Barrator, which was aimed at Mr Kizon.

While the ACC did not charge Mr Mansfield with an offence at the time, it did utilise WA law to freeze his assets - including two properties, four cars, his share portfolio and bank accounts.

The accounts included $1.1 million of Mr Kizon's cash earmarked to trade securities in an equal profit-share deal.
After the pair were twice cleared of separate criminal accusations of conspiring to insider trade shares in internet pornography company AdultShop.com, the DPP vowed to continue to fight claims by Mr Mansfield that he could have earned tens of millions of dollars in share trading profits if he had been able to continue.

Mr Mansfield was set to argue that his use of trading software Metastock would have made him a fortune.
Instead, the former casino manager turned stockbroker said he was financially and personally ruined by the freezing order, which also enveloped properties owned by his wife.

His lawyer Martin Bennett previously described the toll the freezing order had taken on Mr Mansfield's family.
"He couldn't afford to buy a bottle of milk or a newspaper," he said.

"Mr Mansfield's marriage broke up, his daughter was unable to complete her TEE - his family went through hell."
Experts employed by the DPP had been given extra months to examine spreadsheets charting 12 years of Mr Mansfield's hypothetical trades.
Yesterday, the warring parties reached a settlement without the need for a concluding court hearing, with the resolution confirmed in a one-line statement from the DPP.

"The Director confirms that the parties have now settled the proceedings on a confidential basis," it said. "Therefore, all court dates have now been vacated."

The confidentiality agreement surrounding the settlement meant Mr Mansfield was unable to comment when contacted.
Mr Kizon said he was waiting to find out how much his family trust would get.

link (https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/28072530/kizon-and-mansfield-win-10m-dpp-payout/)