Comments on: Really…this is surprising? http://www.seanpaune.com/2007/03/09/reallythis-is-surprising/ Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:24:03 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Sean P Aune http://www.seanpaune.com/2007/03/09/reallythis-is-surprising/comment-page-1/#comment-15001 Sean P Aune Sun, 11 Mar 2007 19:06:05 +0000 http://seanpaune.com/?p=977#comment-15001 It was a normal bank audit and it was a mixture of: A. We had a "suspicious" number of checking accounts and B. We were "DBA" under too many names (I went back and looked up the letter) I have 5 different online stores, each with a different domain name, like I can help the fact my customers write out their payments to the domain names when they send in money orders! So, we had to start using our blanket corporate name...which customers still aren't doing like they're told to. As for if it's legal...my bank didn't raise a stink, so I'm not sure. It was a normal bank audit and it was a mixture of:

A. We had a “suspicious” number of checking accounts

and

B. We were “DBA” under too many names

(I went back and looked up the letter)

I have 5 different online stores, each with a different domain name, like I can help the fact my customers write out their payments to the domain names when they send in money orders! So, we had to start using our blanket corporate name…which customers still aren’t doing like they’re told to. As for if it’s legal…my bank didn’t raise a stink, so I’m not sure.

]]> By: Luis http://www.seanpaune.com/2007/03/09/reallythis-is-surprising/comment-page-1/#comment-14996 Luis Sun, 11 Mar 2007 11:44:23 +0000 http://seanpaune.com/?p=977#comment-14996 Um... doesn't this suggest that the government--not the IRS, but the DoJ or something--is closely tracking your bank accounts? Is that legal? Um… doesn’t this suggest that the government–not the IRS, but the DoJ or something–is closely tracking your bank accounts?

Is that legal?

]]> By: Sean P Aune http://www.seanpaune.com/2007/03/09/reallythis-is-surprising/comment-page-1/#comment-14994 Sean P Aune Sat, 10 Mar 2007 16:10:35 +0000 http://seanpaune.com/?p=977#comment-14994 Oh I'm not that excited about it, like you, I'm just shocked! "They actually admitted to abuse of powers?!?" The FBI always has, still does, and always will abuse their powers. Same with the CIA. If you put that much power in someone's hands, it will eventually be abused by a percentage of them. As for the checking accounts...yep. Bank auditors labeled our number of accounts "suspicious" (2 personals, 1 family joint, 2 business) and ordered our bank to have us cut the number of accounts immediately. Everyone who works in that bank has known us for 20+ years, told the auditors they were nuts, they didn't care, said it was under the Patriot Act...it was a huge pain in the butt is what it was. It all stemmed from when we used to bank at two separate banks. When we left bank B, it was just easier for us to open fresh accounts for those same funds. It was just a matter of things be easier on us knowing where funds were coming from due to web sales went in to one account, convention sales in to another, just helped with our book keeping. Nope, government wouldn't have it and we had to condense things. Oh I’m not that excited about it, like you, I’m just shocked! “They actually admitted to abuse of powers?!?” The FBI always has, still does, and always will abuse their powers. Same with the CIA. If you put that much power in someone’s hands, it will eventually be abused by a percentage of them.

As for the checking accounts…yep. Bank auditors labeled our number of accounts “suspicious” (2 personals, 1 family joint, 2 business) and ordered our bank to have us cut the number of accounts immediately. Everyone who works in that bank has known us for 20+ years, told the auditors they were nuts, they didn’t care, said it was under the Patriot Act…it was a huge pain in the butt is what it was.

It all stemmed from when we used to bank at two separate banks. When we left bank B, it was just easier for us to open fresh accounts for those same funds. It was just a matter of things be easier on us knowing where funds were coming from due to web sales went in to one account, convention sales in to another, just helped with our book keeping. Nope, government wouldn’t have it and we had to condense things.

]]> By: Luis http://www.seanpaune.com/2007/03/09/reallythis-is-surprising/comment-page-1/#comment-14991 Luis Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:21:51 +0000 http://seanpaune.com/?p=977#comment-14991 And, uh, wha? Too many checking accounts? Seriously? That's not allowed? And, uh, wha? Too many checking accounts? Seriously? That’s not allowed?

]]> By: Luis http://www.seanpaune.com/2007/03/09/reallythis-is-surprising/comment-page-1/#comment-14990 Luis Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:21:19 +0000 http://seanpaune.com/?p=977#comment-14990 Oh, hell, they've been abusing it for <em>years</em>. Remember the Texas state Democrats who left the state so as to avoid a quorum wherein the Republicans could shove through off-census redistricting? Remember how Tom DeLay used the Homeland Security Department to track them down? And that's simply the most public abuse. Look at Bush's current Saturday-night-slaughter of US Attorneys under the Patriot Act provision for replacing USA's in emergency circumstances, now used for placement of cronies and political operatives, and to demonstrate to all the USA's that if they investigate Republicans, don't investogate Democrats, or generally don't do the bidding of any Republican politician, they will get canned. Still, I am shocked that they actually admitted to some offenses... which, most likely, will never be punished. Just yet another case of gross violation of the law by the administrative branch, nothing to get excited about. Oh, hell, they’ve been abusing it for years. Remember the Texas state Democrats who left the state so as to avoid a quorum wherein the Republicans could shove through off-census redistricting? Remember how Tom DeLay used the Homeland Security Department to track them down? And that’s simply the most public abuse. Look at Bush’s current Saturday-night-slaughter of US Attorneys under the Patriot Act provision for replacing USA’s in emergency circumstances, now used for placement of cronies and political operatives, and to demonstrate to all the USA’s that if they investigate Republicans, don’t investogate Democrats, or generally don’t do the bidding of any Republican politician, they will get canned.

Still, I am shocked that they actually admitted to some offenses… which, most likely, will never be punished. Just yet another case of gross violation of the law by the administrative branch, nothing to get excited about.

]]>