Opinions, please? (PITA client)

[Catherine]

Oh, man, I had one royal PITA client bugging me by email yesterday. I sent him a polite "you're fired" letter a couple weeks ago. He still has NOT provided me with 1099-MISC for his 2015 vendors (yes, the ones due 1/31/2016), and NO information for 2015. He had that requested monthly all year long. Finally got fed up and fired him. Now the jackass is mad at ME for firing him "without warning or 2 weeks' notice" and what is he going to do now?  Nor did he even sign & return the engagement letter sent in Jan 2016

Do I even bother responding a second time? (First response was reiteration that this is "not up for negotiation.") Or just let him stew, and refuse any/all phone calls?

[JohnH]

What's he upset about?  Not sure what he means about the 2-week's warning.  Following his normal practices,  he has at least until Dec 2017 to get his 2016 Forms 1099-Misc prepared and the 2016 return completed.   I think that's plenty of advance notice.

[Catherine]

He's throwing a tantrum.  He missed the 10/17 date for 2015 taxes and has given me nothing - but now is upset that he has to find someone else with "no notice" claiming it's like he walked out of a job halfway through a kitchen renovation (contractor).  No, it's more like he walked away from a job that was discussed but never had a plan approved, a contract signed, or a deposit paid.

[RitaB]

I might just edit my email from "you're fired" to "you're fired in two weeks if you don't get your  in here" and resend. 

I probably would not say anything else and let him calm down.  He'll forget in a week anyway.  If he shows up before the two weeks is up (yeah right), carry on as usual, except my rates went up from a year ago.

[Catherine]

26 minutes ago, RitaB said:

except my rates went up from a year ago.

...paid in advance!

[jklcpa]

5 hours ago, Catherine said:

...paid in advance!

No way. You don't really want this client, do you?  I would politely state what you have said here, that he never signed engagement letter or any binding agreement and that your monthly reminders did not spur him into acting on them.  That being said, even with no engagement letter, unless you specifically addressed his procrastination in those monthly reminder emails and the fact that you continued to send them may have given him the impression that this was business as usual, especially if this was typical of your relationship with this client over a number of years. 

[BLACK BART]

Gosh, I dunno. These situations are such personal things (between them and their quirks and us and ours) that it's hard to generalize.  I guess the question is: Would you take him back?  Under the circumstances, I don't think I'd do anything but wait and see if he phones or comes in to talk in person.  If he apologizes and you're willing to do the work, then all's okay - if still hostile then I'd tell him it's his fault, that I notified him monthly and he ignored it, so I'm not doing his taxes anymore. This works - I did it once, but the downside was he gave me a cussin' goin' out the door which I ignored (he was quite large). Besides, it's against the law to shoot anybody not moving toward you although, just in case, I keep a .38 in the desk (you never know).  

Hmm, come to think of it, that scenario doesn't need to be repeated -- probably would just go smoother following Rita's suggestion (let it blow over).

[BulldogTom]

Last year I went through the same thing with a client.  But she did the unthinkable and made my wife cry.  I fired her.  She called up and went off on me.  I was polite and stood my ground.  She called her sister who was a long time client and I lost that one too.  Her brother, who was in the middle of getting his last 7 years of unfiled returns cleaned up by me did not even think about leaving.  He begged to stay. 

I think that you should talk to him if you can keep your cool.  Explain that you cannot take on his work if he is not going to do his part.  You need the records and if he cannot provide them in a timely manner then you will not prepare the return.

If this guy "gets under your skin" and causes you to lose your cool, then do it all in writing. 

Just my 2Cents.

Tom
Newark, CA

[BHoffman]

I vote to ignore the email.  Sounds like your procrastinator is mad at himself and took it out on you.  If so, then any response from you might encourage him to continue his silly blaming and quasi-bullying.

Let him just go away. 

[Jack from Ohio]

Ignore the last e-mail

Block his e-mail address in your e-mail program.

If he is on FaceBook, block him there.

Block his phone numbers on all your phone lines.

If you have any of his information, send it back to him certified mail, return receipt requested

Sleep well knowing you have saved yourself another ulcer...

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

I'd say when you are done, be done, no matter what.  No communication at all.  Jack's advice to return all data is great (keep a copy in case you are dragged to court or something along those lines).

No response from you means no added fuel.  (Hard learned lesson.)

I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it. George Bernard Shaw
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgebern137450.html

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."  George Bernard Shaw
 

[Roberts]

I agree with not responding to communications. I wouldn't block the person but would save all communications given to you.

Fired a client about 3 weeks ago. She received a $25 bill from the state for not making estimated tax payments. Said it very plainly on the letter but she declared that's NOT what it said and that I needed to pay the $25 because that's what H&R Block would do. After admitting she never made state estimated payments and recognizing I'd warned her about it for years - I told her to go to H&R Block and never return. These people just aren't worth it.

I've fired 3 clients in the last year and have never felt better about my life! I only have one more jerk on my list and I doubt he comes back. He blamed me for an "error" in his return yet recognized in our email communications that I had 2x asked a question to clarify, 2x he gave me an answer which justified my actions yet in his opinion I should have ignored what he wrote and followed through on what he should have said. He had ME explain to his ex-wife why we took the deduction "by accident" because he was such a freakin wimp.

[Roberts]

Well isn't this ironic timing. One of the 3 I've fired just had his brother / attorney call to threaten legal action against me for improperly preparing his return in 2015.

He demanded 2 years ago that i depreciate his rental property BEFORE he placed it into service. I refused and declared he was rehabbing it and you can't depreciate an investment (he had no occupancy permit or working utilities so how could he rent it?).

Last year (one of the reasons his questions were so stupid) he demanded I section 179 his residential rental property so that he could get a massive refund and buy another property. Supposedly a real estate seminar he went to said this was okay.

It took about 15 minutes for his brother to recognize how uninformed his client is on the subject.

[JohnH]

3 hours ago, Medlin Software said:

I'd say when you are done, be done, no matter what.  No communication at all.  Jack's advice to return all data is great (keep a copy in case you are dragged to court or something along those lines).

No response from you means no added fuel.  (Hard learned lesson.)

I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it. George Bernard Shaw
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgebern137450.html

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."  George Bernard Shaw
 

One of my two favorite pig analogies. 

Here's the other one, which I try to remember when tempted to explain tax rules to some people::

"Never try to teach a pig to sing.  All you get for your efforts is bad music and a frustrated pig".

[FDNY]

I've always enjoyed firing a client because it is usually for good reason and I got peace of mind.   They are usually a problem for one reason or another.  The last two I fired were a brother and sister, partners in real estate wanting me to be a partner in tax fraud.  I politely explained that it would be better to find someone else that may suit their needs.  Yes, they got mad and said I was abandoning them but I kept my cool, gave them my reasons and wished them well.   Catherine, if your guy calls again tell him how you really feel about his case and what you think is best for both of you.

Or, send him to me so I could fire him. 

[BulldogTom]

1 hour ago, JohnH said:

One of my two favorite pig analogies. 

Here's the other one, which I try to remember when tempted to explain tax rules to some people::

"Never try to teach a pig to sing.  All you get for your efforts is bad music and a frustrated pig".

I just watched the Tina Fey movie Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.  Billy Bob Thornton has a line I will never forget in that movie.  I will clean it up for this board but you will get the idea.

Tina Fey to Billy Bob - "What do you think about this war in Afghanistan?"

Billy Bob - "It is like having sex with a gorilla, you keep going until the gorilla is done wanting to have sex".

If you saw the movie, you know what he really said.  Same principle with a fired client...it just keeps going until they are done.

Tom
Newark, CA

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

Ugh.  Fired has to mean fired.  Quit has to mean quit  Former customer who went on a rant, with profanities and threats to sue if we ever contacted them again, asked to order again.  They are now livid because I am not replying, since they stated if I replied I would be sued.  I am twisted enough to sort of laugh, but not twisted enough to feel sad some people act like they are.

The impetus was this person was reselling their software license to others, and was caught (by one of their clients who contacted me for assistance).  Our former customer had to deal with at least one unhappy client of theirs, when I refused to assist - directing them back to the person who improperly took money fro them for a license they had no permission to sell.

Today's messages from them started with asking to order again, trying to blame a former employee, then dropped back to the same vile stuff that got them fired in the first place.  All messages came from the same email address, so I doubt the person really had an employee acting without their knowledge, since the email address is personal in nature, not a business account or name.

The firing consisted of a letter saying we were no longer doing business with them, and a full refund for their most recent order.  I suspect the issue today is now that the new year is here, their ill gotten license is no longer working for them, nor for the unsuspecting folks who were duped by them.

[Margaret CPA in OH]

And I thought I had problems with my client's issues with IRS!  I do not envy you with this.  People can really be so ugly...

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

While frustrating, this one is a piece of cake.  A few years back, a former customer was on trial for tax fraud.  (IIIRC, was filing using inappropriate items, such as EITC, and was keeping the extra.  I think they were taking advantage of folks not native to the US, with little education or experience.  Was making sure they got something "back" from his pocket, but had their refund deposited in an account he controlled!)  Phone subpoena from the IRS for us. (Was actually not bad, once we explained our business.)  The problem was of course, this person again IIRC, was proving there is no fool like someone defending themselves in court, saw we had to make a statement, and made threats against me and my family if we cooperated.  Forwarded that information up the chain.  The person was convicted and will be in the care of us (via Uncle Sam) for quite some time.

Had another who was running a series of filling stations.  Would skip out on paying any withholding, UI, etc, then "go out of business" and start up as a new entity AT THE SAME LOCATIONS.  We figured it out on our end and refused to do business with them, and after a year or so after we figured it out, the government caught up as well, deposing us along the way (to see if they could hook us into the liability chain, deep pockets lose and all that).

F. Gump was a GENIUS.

[Catherine]

I've been thinking I should update folks on my former client.  

After his last email, I refused to respond and had silence from him.  Then, when he got back the blank checks we had mailed (from when we did paper-check payroll for him, which ended some years ago when we switched him to an online service with direct deposit), he emailed again asking if that meant we weren't doing payroll anymore - ignoring the part of my letter saying no interruption in payroll service.  I responded back saying no, employee on direct deposit for years and we have no need for his checks.  More silence .  Hooray!
 

And for Jerry @Medlin Software - I know your system does direct deposit.  The guy's tiny bank was clueless and refused to work with us, plus the online folks directly debit the client's bank which means WE get paid every month instead of once or twice a year.  Yours is still the easiest pr system I've ever used - and it *does* do household employee payroll if you sweet-talk it just right.  

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

DD is always an interesting topic.  In many (most?) cases, it is not easier or cheaper for the employer.  It does keep employees from taking time during work to deposit.  Had a conversation with a person from a credit union, new to our software, who could not find anyone at their own office who knew how to handle ACH.  The other "rub" is many bank's/CU's have some sort of payroll product they offer, which they likely get more money (commission and probably sign up bonus).

With the change in check processing, there is little, and sometimes no delay, in accessing funds by check compared to before all went electronic.  Especially with deposit by phone app.

[Abby Normal]

I was sitting in line at the bank drive-up one Friday (with dozen of others) and it hit me how ludicrous it was to drive across town with a piece of paper to have a person data enter that document into their computer so money could be moved from the company's account to my account. I gladly pay the DD fees every payroll.

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

DD can be handy, but just hope if not the sole account of the employee, there is never a dispute with the others who have access to the account.  The law is somewhat grey, say if the non-employee party takes the funds, and the employee says they never got the funds.  You may find yourself paying twice, and resorting to checks again.  (It has and does happen).  Checks can have the same issue.  Employee goes to a check cashing place (for instance) which gets the holder in due course issue involved.  Employee then says the check was lost.  You likely have to pay both as it is the cheaper way to go.  One other, of the top of my head, is when an employee wants you to act as their money manager, depositing into multiple accounts.  Opens up the issue of access of other parties, and doubling the cost and trouble should the deposit go awry (it happens too).

Just another cost of being an employer... As I sit in CA where another year goes by while our elected officials refuse to alter our UI system and actually fund it from normal contributions.  Instead, they let the feds "garnish" surviving employers at end of year.  It is all about avoiding their next election opponent being able to put out a mailer saying the incumbent raised employer taxes (since the electorate does not understand or care what actually is happening).

[Gail in Virginia]

Could you explain what you mean about the check cashing place and the holder in due course issue? 

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

It is a legal term.  In my example, the check cashing place has a properly endorsed check, no hint of fraud, and you have to honor it.  Stop payment, loss claim, does not matter.  You have to deal with the employee, and probably, at least at first, have to pay the employee as well as the check cashing place.  Your recourse is only with the person the check was made out to...  The third party gets PAID no matter what, if it meets the due course rules (and in practice, even if it does not, since it is likely cheaper to pay than to fight).

https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/3/3-302

Likely examples and explanations by online search.

Those that work in large payroll offices are familiar with this, as given enough volume and time, they will see it.  Came up for me many years ago when a payroll check was :"washed".  The party who got the "washed" check could have easily claimed the check met the HiDC rules.  Thankfully, was only for someone I was preparing payroll for.  The employer ended up paying both the employee (who must have lost the check) as well as the recipient of the washed check.  It was a business with high turnover, and the employee turned over shortly after - I have no idea why...  I did get to see the washed check.  it was done very well.  Lost "art" now, since anyone can print checks as long as they have a valid routing and account number.  No more "Catch Me if You Can".

Cash is the only way to safely pay employees - safely meaning no later risk of having to pay twice assuming some sort of valid proof of receipt is collected.  There are still some who choose this method, and I have not seen any locality where cash is not allowed.

If I were back in the days where I was paying lower paid employees with fair turnover, with my current knowledge, it would be cash payouts for me.  (Secondary reason, the local officials would likely give me a concealed carry permit again, with cash carrying being the reason).