Yesterday, ABC27 News in Harrisburg broadcast interviews with local business owners about the Penbrook situation.
Click here for previous posts about Penbrook, including posts about Penbrook charging business owners criminally with filing false tax returns - even when the Borough has not seen the owner's return at all.
Showing posts with label Penbrook Borough. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Penbrook Borough. Show all posts
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Monday, January 17, 2011
Penbrook Borough updates
There is a new website dedicated solely to the battles involving Penbrook Borough and the Borough's fights against property owners and investors. Click here to view this site.
Check out my posts involving Penbrook here (or click the "label" at the bottom of this post).
Check out my posts involving Penbrook here (or click the "label" at the bottom of this post).
Monday, December 27, 2010
Penbrook Borough litigation, citations, tax and sewer rate increases
In August, I commented on Penbrook Borough's requirement that rental property owners file copies of their own federal tax returns with the Borough office. As I stated in August:
Since that time, one investor filed suit against the Borough as a result of this requirement and other Borough initiated litigation.
The Harrisburg Patriot-News reported yesterday on this lawsuit and some of the issues behind it. That Patriot quoted Plaintiff Michael Coleman's research showing that the Borough filed 562 citations in 2009, despite having only about 3,000 residents. As a guest on the Bob Durgin radio show this afternoon (on WHP 580) Coleman cited public records showing that all but about 80 of those citations were unsuccessful.
Coleman further stated that Penbrook's campaign of citations is motivated by the Borough's need for revenue, a claim that is supported in part by Penbrook's increase in real estate taxes and sewer rates a year ago.
Penbrook's employees have begun to embroil the Borough in an ever widening controversy, the outcome of which depends only on the willingness of investors and residents to appeal to the Court of Common Pleas or otherwise challenge the Borough in Court.
Since that time, one investor filed suit against the Borough as a result of this requirement and other Borough initiated litigation.
The Harrisburg Patriot-News reported yesterday on this lawsuit and some of the issues behind it. That Patriot quoted Plaintiff Michael Coleman's research showing that the Borough filed 562 citations in 2009, despite having only about 3,000 residents. As a guest on the Bob Durgin radio show this afternoon (on WHP 580) Coleman cited public records showing that all but about 80 of those citations were unsuccessful.
Coleman further stated that Penbrook's campaign of citations is motivated by the Borough's need for revenue, a claim that is supported in part by Penbrook's increase in real estate taxes and sewer rates a year ago.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
New lawsuit filed against Penbrook Borough;
I have written previously about actions of Penbrook Borough in Dauphin County against investors, including charges for filing false tax returns against those who had filed no returns at all. On November 3rd, one such investor filed a lawsuit against the Borough in the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas. The suit, filed by a pro se Plaintiff, identifies several acts of the Borough and its manager that have created liability.
The suit is docketed at 2010 CV 14365 CV and is available for public review.
More such suits are possible.
The suit is docketed at 2010 CV 14365 CV and is available for public review.
More such suits are possible.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Penbrook Borough litigation against investors; tax returns; municipal charges and fines.
In recent months, Penbrook Borough (Dauphin County) has demanded that real estate investors submit copies of their federal tax returns to the Borough. Those that have refused to comply have been charged criminally with filing false tax returns - even those who have failed to file any returns at all.
This summer, the Borough dropped charges against one investor that has been so charged (for fear of a civil rights lawsuit).
Penbrook has also charged investors as individuals (related to registration requirements) even though they own real estate in the name of an LLC, thus disregarding the corporate entity.
Additional lawsuits and enforcement actions remain pending against other investors (and homeowners) over minor matters.
Penbrook's employees have begun to embroil the Borough in an ever widening controversy, the outcome of which depends only on the willingness of investors and residents to appeal to the Court of Common Pleas or otherwise challenge the Borough in Court.
This summer, the Borough dropped charges against one investor that has been so charged (for fear of a civil rights lawsuit).
Penbrook has also charged investors as individuals (related to registration requirements) even though they own real estate in the name of an LLC, thus disregarding the corporate entity.
Additional lawsuits and enforcement actions remain pending against other investors (and homeowners) over minor matters.
Penbrook's employees have begun to embroil the Borough in an ever widening controversy, the outcome of which depends only on the willingness of investors and residents to appeal to the Court of Common Pleas or otherwise challenge the Borough in Court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)