Chisoxfn

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 3, 2015 -> 10:49 AM) Ok, so here is the latest update. Yes, it was at 2%. My uncle and Moms name were both on the title. My uncle has another house so they took it as my mom was renting from him, in which case that is considered 2% to the landlord (my uncle). We obviously didn't look at it that way. So that blows. Once word came out about the possibility, we finally just took his name off. Had this been done since the beginning, we would have saved a ton of money and possibly wouldn't be in this situation. It WILL be put up for auction. We have a year to redeem it after the sale. How that works I'm unsure. I'm not sure if it's too late to do some sort of retro action. Provide proof as to why and how you weren't renting from your uncle and that none of the payments, etc, were tied.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Sep 3, 2015 -> 10:21 AM) I would think the property tax cap at 2% would mean that you would owe 1200 per year (vs. what they are coming up with). I also would think in this case you are talking about a homestead property (isn't that a home that you live in as a personal residence)? I absolutely think you need to talk with the tax people as it sounds like you have issues their. In terms of the taxes, do you know roughly when you stopped paying (i.e., how many years it has been, so you can get a gauge as to the amount that is back taxes vs. amount that is penalties). I presume you guys aren't getting the homestead exemption because someone didn't fill out paperwork. I know I get some stupid form from time to time and have to mail back in confirming we are primary residence in our personal property (again, this is in California). By the way SCS, that should be good news in and of itself (although I don't know how the county will react to applying that homestead exception on a retro basis) but in theory, that means whatever the amount you owe is, should at a minimum be cut in half as you've been taxed twice what you should have been. I presume you guys can show support that you have maintained the house as a primary residence that entire time (and thus would qualify for the homestead exemption) and would think state would eventually correct (especially if you got a little media swell behind it). Talk about how a family would lose a home they've had for 75 years because they didn't fill the paperwork properly and qualify for the homestead exemption, etc. Plus the smaller the actual amount owed is, I presume the more likely the county backs off / pushes back the event. PS: You also absolutely need to provide the state with the appraisal from the bank you used on the reverse mortgage, showing them what the appraised amount is and request that the county reappraises your property (and again, lowering the amount you would be required to pay going forward...a good attorney could probably get it applied retro as well, presuming market conditions remained similar at this points in time).

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 3, 2015 -> 10:03 AM) Here is what we are dealing with. Assessed Value And Tax Summary 2014 Pay 2015 1a. Gross Assessed Value (AV) of homestead property (capped at 1%) 0 1b. Gross AV of residential property and farmland (capped at 2%) 60,000 1c. Gross AV of all other property, including personal property (capped at 3%) 0 2. Equals Total Gross Assessed Value of Property 60,000 2a. Minus Deductions (See Table 5 Below) - 0 3. Equals Subtotal of Net Assessed Value of Property 60,000 3a. Multiplied by Your Local Tax Rate 4.9571 4. Equals Gross Tax Liability (See Table 3 Below) 2,974.26 4a. Minus Local Property Tax Credits - 377.16 4b. Minus Savings Due to Property Tax Cap (See Table 2 Below) - 717.52 4c. Minus Savings Due to 65 Years & Older Cap - 0.00 5. Total Property Tax Liability 1,879.58 When we moved in the property was appraised at 60,000. I would think the property tax cap at 2% would mean that you would owe 1200 per year (vs. what they are coming up with). I also would think in this case you are talking about a homestead property (isn't that a home that you live in as a personal residence)? I absolutely think you need to talk with the tax people as it sounds like you have issues their. In terms of the taxes, do you know roughly when you stopped paying (i.e., how many years it has been, so you can get a gauge as to the amount that is back taxes vs. amount that is penalties). I presume you guys aren't getting the homestead exemption because someone didn't fill out paperwork. I know I get some stupid form from time to time and have to mail back in confirming we are primary residence in our personal property (again, this is in California).

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 3, 2015 -> 09:29 AM) Excuse me, 1900, and yes. That is without penalties. 950 in May and 950 in November. Okay so something isn't adding up in terms of the actual appraisal on the home then. You are paying property taxes based upon a home with an assessed value of $190K where as the appraisal you got was only 25K. If you home is really worth $25K (vs. $190K), I think you guys have to have some conversations with the county on what the right value is and provide them with relevant comps, etc, to reduce the assessed value and then reach a settelement on the taxes. Or was it more on the reverse equity, they appraised the home at 250K, but were only going to give a line of up to 10% of the homes equity, and thus the line was at 25K (250K x 10%). I am totally not familiar with Indiana state law but in California the assessed property value can go up 2% per year (capped at that amount) but in a downturn, you can submit for reappraisals of the value to lower you basis. I presume similar logic applies in Indiana.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 3, 2015 -> 09:22 AM) Ours is/was at 2100. I'm not sure if that is with penalties or what. Per year property tax is 2100? Or was that including other items? If property taxes are caped at 1% (as Region pointed out), then that would indicate they are taxing the property based upon an assessed value of $210K (if my mental calculator is right). I think you need to find out how to talk on behalf of your mom and get the breakout of the taxes (actual taxes) vs. penalties, etc. Someone should be able to get you that info and then you at least have all the facts when you arm yourself for various discussions. I think if you know what actual taxes are and can say, okay, actual amount owed is $2500...we will give you a lump sum of x and then pay the rest back over 12 months or something and you might have some ammo. As I mentioned, could help to get a real estate attorney involved as well (might even be able to find someone who does pro bono work).

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Sep 3, 2015 -> 07:33 AM) This is total bulls***. Brady is a cheater and a jackass. I actually wish physical harm upon him. I still don't get how judges can tell the NFL how to run their league. If I were the league I'd tell the Patriots if Brady takes the field, they forfeit the game. Luck should be suspended too since they had a bunch of delated footballs.

One other point, I think as you do this, especially as you reach out to other organizations, you want to make sure you spend some time talking with your mom and getting a full understanding of all the facts. Is the 10K in back taxes because of fees and penalties mounting up, are their ways to get those waived (I know all the time their are people who negotiate down and settle with the government and pay very little fees) as I would think the actual property taxes on the property (given the $25K appraisal) would be far less than the $10K and the $10K is really driven by all of the penalties of fine. I don't know what the state tax property rates are, but if the property was valued at $25K (not sure what the tax appraised value is as that could be different) and the tax rate is 1% (that happens to be basically the base rate in California, not certain about Indiana), your annual tax rate is $250. So even if taxes weren't paid for 20 years, you are talking $5K (excluding penalties, etc). I would think you might have ability to negotiate a significantly reduced settlement where government ultimately gets its fair share of the taxes and you could keep your home. This is presuming their isn't some other assessment or lien that is driving that amount. But if the amount is $10K and taxes hadn't been paid for 5 or 10 years, then the bulk of that amount is penalties and penalties are usually easier to get negotiated. I would make sure you have all that data handy, what is really factoring into the $10K and be at the county's office or whoever handles this stuff and ask for an stay in the auction and start to work to negotiate. I also would think their are legal services which could help (although you have to be careful of not finding some con artist / scammer out their either). But I would think their are multiple avenues if it is purely back taxes on the property (and the property is ultimately worth more then those back taxes).

Do you have more specifics? Is the issue other debt / obligations and payments their in addition to being behind on the mortgage? Is their equity in the current property or is it negative. Depending on circumstances, their might be a lot of different cards to play, some of which would involve various forms of BK, etc. Not to mention potential government programs.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 04:46 PM) You shouldn't sit somewhere if you are in danger, and especially if you aren't going to watch the damned game. Well in that case, might as well bar 90% of the people from attending the games and cut the revenue (and I'm probably understating that number). Easy to make that statement but I guarantee every die hard fan runs that risk as well. As I've said, the once a year I take my daughter (or the one time ever I took her) I bought seats where she wouldn't be in harms way and I will continue to not buy seats where they aren't in harms way. If a net was put up, I'd sit closer and they'd get more of my $'s. Which, afterall, is the #1 thing these sports franchises are after. Bottom line, when you go to a sporting event, you shouldn't be in danger. Should Nascar have just ignored the safety rules and just told fans if they want to risk dying, get in those seats and deal with it, and if you don't, just buy cheaper seats? No. A sporting environment should be safe both from violence from other fans (harder to control because whacko's can do anything and it amazed me it took as long as it did for stadiums / teams to start having you go through metal detectors) and from being hurt from objects from the field of play. I realize odds are minimal but bottom line, how would any of us feel if it was their kid who got killed at a game because of something so trivial as the lack of a net. And by the way, even the players have nets and protection now because they too are not quick enough to dodge shots coming into the dugout. And also prevent the Mo Vaughn's of the world from ruining their careers.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 03:37 PM) The bright side, of course, is that sets you up for your QB next April. Oh, I'm not complaining. All things considered I am very happy with where we are. We have a legit coaching staff and candidates I have faith in and while everyone panics over the secretiveness of everyone on injuries, I really don't care. Just figure out a way to collect a lot of talent and win. In terms of Pace, I can't really gripe with anything he's done to date and he deserves the benefit of time. We could complain about McDonald but he hedged his financial risk their and he clearly had no idea White was going to be out and big picture, as long as White can play long term, oh well if he loses this year. We weren't winning the superbowl anyway. Plus I have to give him credit for bringing in this coaching staff. Otherwise he didn't have a lot to work with. The key will be hitting in the draft and player development and having smart FA signings. Of course it is all easier if Bears hit the jackpot on a franchise QB, which again, being awful this year might only help. Priorities are going to be significantly increasing the athleticism of the defense and the secondary as well as upgrading the oline and finding a QB (although if you can't find the franchise QB a year from now, not end of the world going with Jay if he regresses back towards the mean / improves in a more run oriented system which takes the ball out of his hands and plays more to his overall strength's.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 12:59 PM) Bringing a glove is fine, and if you are with little kids, or people who don't pay full attention and are close, it could save a lot of trouble. I would rather be required to "lug a glove" to the game in order to sit close than watch behind a net. The net doesn't always save you either. I was in the Scout Seats once in my life. There was a server who would sit on the short wall behind home with his back right up against the net. We kept on asking him to move because he was blocking our view. He would, but would always come back, until a foul ball nailed his back. He wasn't hurt so bad, thankfully, but what a moron. I was about 15 rows back from the Sox dugout on Sunday when a foul ball went into the club level but caromed downstairs and hit a lady right on top of the head. She had no idea it was coming. If you are sitting a row back from the dugout, a glove isn't going to do most people any good. Ability to react is minimal. Not to mention, it is baseball, majority of fans aren't watching every single pitch (especially in the regular season). The baseball experience, for most fans in attendance, includes the joys of catching up with the people you are going to the game with. So glove or no glove, reality is you have a higher percentage of people not paying attention then any other sport, imo.

By the way, if I ignored 2014, he would be my #1 prospect. His minor league track record would be superior and he has the stuff to back it up (as the only year he didn't show the stuff was last year).

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 01:39 PM) I'd agree with that, though around 5 is possible. if I am ignoring everything and using FutureSox top 5 as my listing, I am absolutely ranking him ahead of Micah and Spencer Adams and consider ranking him ahead of Montas, primarily because I think Johnson has shown enough in 2015 (and in previous seasons) that probably of being an effective starter is higher vs. Montas who has the bulk of his upside in the pen. So I would say EJ (considering 2014) would be potentially 3rd, absolutely 4th.

Fairly certain we will be really bad. We don't even have any wideouts right now and have zero tackles. This team is set up to be very bad. Defensively you have no anchor's / young proven playmakers. Now the hope is some of those guys emerge but this team is seriously devoid of proven (still in its prime) talent, especially in the secondary.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 09:58 AM) He did a sweet Bill O'Brien impression on Hard Knocks though. That is why I recognized the name. Hate giving up draft picks when we are a rebuilding team.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 09:05 AM) Part of his ERA problem was having zero spring training. Using his higher than normal ERA as a defensive failure is incorrect IMO. He has had his games where he has been ripped very hard. I agree he had his games where he was ripped, but I am referring to the comment on ERA vs. FIP and other metrics. Similarly, we saw Shark has also had extremely wide FIP vs. ERA measures, which along with the wealth of defensive data out their (which suggest for the larger pat of the season we were historically bad and for a portion of the season have been just lousy). Bottom line, this was a really poorly build team to put around a strong rotation. And I b****ed about the defense all off-season, so from that perspective, I'm not being a hypocrite. I did think this team would hit better then it did, so obviously, I can't say I predicted that nor did I predict us to be this bad.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 08:48 AM) I think this is the year that has soured me a bit on ERA. Sale is on pace to easily have the worst ERA of his career, but by pretty much any other metric he's having easily the best year of his career. Strikeouts are way up, walks are down, and if you look at his batted ball profile he's easily giving up the weakest contact of his career this year. Career-best FIP and SIERA, and he's throwing a lot more innings/start this season too. Problem is his .321 BABIP, which is significantly higher than his career average. Quintana also has a crazy high BABIP (.343, second highest in the majors after Gio Gonzalez), yet according to his batted ball profile he's also giving up the weakest contact of his career. Just goes to show you how much our defense sucks. But end of the day, ERA matters, because it reflects what ACTUALLY happened. Bottom line, those runs were allowed.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 2, 2015 -> 06:52 AM) I realize this is really petty on my part to even bring it up, but... apparently this clerk has been married four times. LOL No...not petty. If you are going to claim gays are ruining the sanctity of marriage when you yourself are ruining the sanctity of marriage, then you are a total hyprocrite and any religious / personal stand goes away because you don't act in that manner. What a pathetic person. PS: Not only married 4 times, but her first marriage ended when she got pregnant with twins from someone other then her husband.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Aug 28, 2015 -> 09:08 AM) I don't know that there will be an official investigation, but I think there will be enough backlash to put a dent in Subway's business. I can see some of their least profitable stores closing or switching to another chain. I feel bad for the people who own the Subway by me. They're great people, they designate one day each month for each elementary school in the area and donate all of their profit from the day to the school. Yep - That is the hard part, all of the franchisee's who had absolutely nothing to do with this getting impacted because of some people at the top who made a deplorable decision (allegedly).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 28, 2015 -> 08:57 AM) Do you think that will actually be investigated by someone? I would think a claim like that would result investigations from those on the board at subway (presume they have a BOD). I would think people would lose jobs on it and the company would do an investigation. Any well ran organization would do so...then again, most organizations would have handled this information differently (or so I'd like to think). I'm very confident my organization would have never let something like this happen.

QUOTE (bjm676 @ Aug 28, 2015 -> 08:55 AM) Would anyone be opposed if the Sox traded Avi over the offseason, to make room for Trayce? I know I wouldn't. it may be a bit premature to think he's the starting RF for next year, but it's nice to think they have options if the Avi experiment is a failure. I don't know that I'm trading Avi to make room for Trayce but I'm perfectly fine moving Avi. I think we need to see what Trayce can do but his key to success is going to be how good he is defensively. His bat isn't going to stay this hot and maybe he is one of those guys who the switch finally flipped but nothing in his minor league production indicates he's going to be an above average hitter (his tools do indicate he has potential to be though). However, if he can play elite defense and be an average bat, that works great. Also and this would be fine, he might be a guy who can play well above average defense and mash LHPing and be a very good platoon / bench guy and that is okay too. Obviously I'd prefer scenario #1, although I'd find scenario #2 the more plausible one. Either way, it is a positive as both scenarios would involve Trayce being a productive player for the White Sox. The good thing is, Trayce has the pure talent to be one of those guys whose numbers stay relatively unchanged from MILB to MLB and that could be a good thing cause if he could produce something similar to his career .747 minor league OPS along with the defensive value and that is a guy that will be very valuable on a winning club (and cost controlled). I was listening to Trayce's dad on the radio yesterday and he did confirm that he thinks Trayce is the best pure athlete of the bunch (when he considers his physicality, etc). Keep it up Trayce!!!!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 28, 2015 -> 08:46 AM) I fell in love with Jersey Mike's when I worked downtown. I wish we had one out here where I work now. Subway sucks compared to them anyway. Yeah...Jersey Mike's is so much better. If only they'd put a Jimmy John's closer to my work, then I'd have a 2nd solid option. I hadn't even heard of them and then all of a sudden a bunch of them popped up in my area. A little pricier but so so so much better then subway.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Aug 27, 2015 -> 09:32 PM) apparently subway knew going back in 2008 (NEWSER) – Subway may have known about spokesperson Jared Fogle's alleged desire to have sex with children since 2008. At least, that's what the former owner of a Subway restaurant in Florida tells Business Insider. Cindy Mills, who was a Subway franchisee from 2006 to 2012, says Fogle started calling her every day after she met him at a company event in 2008. She says he would make inappropriate comments, telling her "he really liked them young." Mills says Fogle told her he'd had sex with child prostitutes, some as young as 9, in both Thailand and the United States and even encouraged her to prostitute herself on Craigslist. Mills says she went to executives within the company with her concerns but was ignored. She tells Business Insider she spoke to the CEO of Subway's affiliated advertising company, which employed Fogle, and he told her Fogle had recently met a woman who would hopefully "help keep him grounded." She says she didn't go to police because she feared Fogle's "money and influence" and didn't want to lose her job. Business Insider reports Mills did request to remove all images of Fogle from her restaurant, but Subway denied that request. "Every time I would see him on TV in a commercial with his arms around these children, it would kill me," Mills says. "I couldn't stand it anymore." Welp...if this is true and people within Subway knew about this and ignored it, that is it, I won't eat another subway sandwich again. Jersey Mike's will get my business instead.

I am sure Addidas has lots of attorney's seeing if they can find a contractual breach and get out of paying him the remainder of his contract.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 27, 2015 -> 11:17 AM) Another huge difference between this and the Kane case is Rose's attorneys are calling this story outrageous. Kane's, as far as I have heard, have yet to say he didn't do anything criminal. Yeah - Rose's camp seems to be out in front of this. Admit the relationship but said it was consensual and that their is no basis. Also specifically point out that she is on her 3rd attorney and they are advising her because it is a money grab. That said, none of us know.