Now Oma Hamou's whoppers turn to me!
Wow, seems this wannabe playah Miss Thang Oma Hamou finds this little slice of reality about her exaggeratin herself seems to REALLY bother her. I wake up on this nice cool LA mornin to find she posted this huge psychotic ramble on her sham blog (its REALLY a hoot that she pretends to be some sixty year old bald guy, the pic is probably one she got sent from some internet sex hookup place she trolls to find a new sugar daddy...the REALLY big screamer is she uses the screenname "sandman" which is pretty accurate, the psycho shouting puts anyone right to sleep trying to read it)
I really like how the only evidence she provides are her own SELF SERVING STATEMENTS from "affidavits" that don't mean diddly, since they weren't submitted into a trial. She never DOES submit outside verifiable info, ever...Notice the pattern?
Now she starts screamin that I must be Bob Atchison, (pretty funny no?) and now she's saying I make all this stuff up or lie.
Whopper No. 1: I must be Bob Atchison cuz "The Texas Franchise Tax Board won't disclose the exact amount of tax owed." Well Miss Thang, scroll down. I said it was "like $250", not exactly $250. I asked the guy in the tax office it Pallasart had owed alot of money, he said, I can't tell you the exact amount, but it wasn't alot, it was "LIKE $250"... Sorry to disappoint ya, but I aint Bob Atchison. The info in this blog is PUBLIC info, available to anyone via google, Know X, USSearch and the Los Angeles County Superior Court's own PUBLIC website for the criminal and civil filings.
Whopper No. 2: My statements are poorly researched and "intentionally misleading". Well, first Miss Thang Wannabe Oma Hamou and your fictional pscyho alter ego boyfriend Mike Newson, lets just address the reality behind the statment I got from the guy at the Texas Franchise Tax office, shall we? He told me that the forfeiture only affected corporate standing, that the officers were personally liable for debts, but Pallasart was fully within its rights to stay in business. She/he (weird no?) said they were told otherwise.
Ok Miss Thang wannabe playah, a dose of some reality:
The effects of forfeiture may include the denial of the corporation's right to sue in a Texas court, and each officer and directormay become personally liable for certain debts of the corporation. (Tex. Tax Code Ann. 171.251 and 171.252)
If the corporate privileges are forfeited, each officer or director of the corporation may be liable for each debt of the corporation that is created or incurred in Texas after the date on which the report is due and before the corporate privileges are revived, as provided by Tax Code, §171.255.
http://secure.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=T&app=9&p_dir=F&p_rloc=109052&p_tloc=14920&p_ploc=1&pg=2&p_tac=&ti=34&pt=1&ch=3&rl=544
So, lets read the exact language of the code:
§ 171.252. EFFECTS OF FORFEITURE. If the corporate privileges of a corporation are forfeited under this subchapter:
(1) the corporation shall be denied the right to sue or
defend in a court of this state; and
(2) each director or officer of the corporation is
liable for a debt of the corporation as provided by Section 171.255 of this code.
Umm, I don't see anywhere an effect of forfeiture being the loss of ability to conduct business. Lets keep looking...
a domestic filing entity is considered to have continued in existence without interruption from the date of termination only if the filing entity is reinstated before the third (3rd) anniversary of the date of its involuntary termination.
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/corp/forms/811_boc.doc
nope, not here either. I tried the Texas Law Manual next,
Texas Law Manual:( http://www.twc.state.tx.us/ui/tax/manuals/law/law_ch1_02.html)
1.4.6 Forfeiture of Charter - A corporation whose charter has been forfeited remains a corporation. It can neither bring nor defend a suit, except one brought to forfeit charter. It remains liable for debts incurred prior to forfeiture.
1.4.7 Operation Subsequent to Forfeiture
If the corporation whose right to do business has been forfeited takes the necessary action to promptly remedy the defect causing the forfeiture, no status change in the identity of the employing unit is recorded insofar as Commission practice is concerned. ...
However, debts knowingly created by the knowledgeable officers and directors during any period subsequent to the forfeiture of the corporation's right to do business (because of failure to pay franchise taxes) becomes the personal liability of these individuals as if they were partners.
Sorry miss thang wannabee playah Oma Hamou and psycho alter ego boyfriend, the law just don't say what ya want it to say. I guess maybe if you keep up ranting and shreaking long enough somebody "might" start to believe ya. I'll stick with reality though. Suggest strongly that the readers do the same.
I really like how the only evidence she provides are her own SELF SERVING STATEMENTS from "affidavits" that don't mean diddly, since they weren't submitted into a trial. She never DOES submit outside verifiable info, ever...Notice the pattern?
Now she starts screamin that I must be Bob Atchison, (pretty funny no?) and now she's saying I make all this stuff up or lie.
Whopper No. 1: I must be Bob Atchison cuz "The Texas Franchise Tax Board won't disclose the exact amount of tax owed." Well Miss Thang, scroll down. I said it was "like $250", not exactly $250. I asked the guy in the tax office it Pallasart had owed alot of money, he said, I can't tell you the exact amount, but it wasn't alot, it was "LIKE $250"... Sorry to disappoint ya, but I aint Bob Atchison. The info in this blog is PUBLIC info, available to anyone via google, Know X, USSearch and the Los Angeles County Superior Court's own PUBLIC website for the criminal and civil filings.
Whopper No. 2: My statements are poorly researched and "intentionally misleading". Well, first Miss Thang Wannabe Oma Hamou and your fictional pscyho alter ego boyfriend Mike Newson, lets just address the reality behind the statment I got from the guy at the Texas Franchise Tax office, shall we? He told me that the forfeiture only affected corporate standing, that the officers were personally liable for debts, but Pallasart was fully within its rights to stay in business. She/he (weird no?) said they were told otherwise.
Ok Miss Thang wannabe playah, a dose of some reality:
The effects of forfeiture may include the denial of the corporation's right to sue in a Texas court, and each officer and directormay become personally liable for certain debts of the corporation. (Tex. Tax Code Ann. 171.251 and 171.252)
If the corporate privileges are forfeited, each officer or director of the corporation may be liable for each debt of the corporation that is created or incurred in Texas after the date on which the report is due and before the corporate privileges are revived, as provided by Tax Code, §171.255.
http://secure.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=T&app=9&p_dir=F&p_rloc=109052&p_tloc=14920&p_ploc=1&pg=2&p_tac=&ti=34&pt=1&ch=3&rl=544
So, lets read the exact language of the code:
§ 171.252. EFFECTS OF FORFEITURE. If the corporate privileges of a corporation are forfeited under this subchapter:
(1) the corporation shall be denied the right to sue or
defend in a court of this state; and
(2) each director or officer of the corporation is
liable for a debt of the corporation as provided by Section 171.255 of this code.
Umm, I don't see anywhere an effect of forfeiture being the loss of ability to conduct business. Lets keep looking...
a domestic filing entity is considered to have continued in existence without interruption from the date of termination only if the filing entity is reinstated before the third (3rd) anniversary of the date of its involuntary termination.
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/corp/forms/811_boc.doc
nope, not here either. I tried the Texas Law Manual next,
Texas Law Manual:( http://www.twc.state.tx.us/ui/tax/manuals/law/law_ch1_02.html)
1.4.6 Forfeiture of Charter - A corporation whose charter has been forfeited remains a corporation. It can neither bring nor defend a suit, except one brought to forfeit charter. It remains liable for debts incurred prior to forfeiture.
1.4.7 Operation Subsequent to Forfeiture
If the corporation whose right to do business has been forfeited takes the necessary action to promptly remedy the defect causing the forfeiture, no status change in the identity of the employing unit is recorded insofar as Commission practice is concerned. ...
However, debts knowingly created by the knowledgeable officers and directors during any period subsequent to the forfeiture of the corporation's right to do business (because of failure to pay franchise taxes) becomes the personal liability of these individuals as if they were partners.
Sorry miss thang wannabee playah Oma Hamou and psycho alter ego boyfriend, the law just don't say what ya want it to say. I guess maybe if you keep up ranting and shreaking long enough somebody "might" start to believe ya. I'll stick with reality though. Suggest strongly that the readers do the same.
posted by Watchtower at 8:43 AM
<< Home