AUG 29 1994 The Honorable Benjamin A. Gilman U.S. House of Representatives 2185 Rayburn Building Washington, D.C.

20515-3220 Dear Congressman Gilman: This is in response to your inquiry on behalf of your constituent, Dr. XX who has a question about the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Dr. XX has inquired whether the ADA requires insurance companies to make direct deposit of monthly benefit payments for people with vision impairments who have difficulty handling checks because of their disability. The ADA requires public accommodations to make "reasonable modifications" in their policies, practices, and procedures in order to make their goods and services available to persons with disabilities, unless a modification would "fundamentally alter" the nature of the goods and services offered. Absent an investigation, we are unable to determine in this particular situation whether the insurance fund would be required to modify its practices to enable Dr. XX checks to be deposited directly. In reference to Dr. XX letter about his 1989 and 1990 Federal Income Tax Returns, we suggest that you contact the Internal Revenue Service. The Department of Justice does not have jurisdiction over these matters. We hope that this information is useful to you and your constituent. Sincerely, Stuart J. Ishimaru Acting Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division Enclosure 01-03381 XX M.D., M.B.A. New City, NY XX Simple Telephone XX

Caller Controlled Voice Mail/Facsimile Machine XX June 13, 1994 Honorable Benjamin Gilman United States House of Representatives 2185 Rayburn Building Washington, D.C. 20515-3222 Facsimile (202) 225-2541 ATTN: Jason Epstein Dear Mr. Gilman, Since I have become disabled from my work I have contacted the three insurance companies with which I have disability income insurance. At this time all three companies are either paying me by benefits or are making final decisions. Because of my vision impairment I find it very difficult to handle any object without risking misplacing it. This is a very serious problem and while at times it is almost comical to see me scurrying around trying to determine where I put something down, it is emotionally very depressing. That is why I have requested of all three insurance companies to provide me with wire direct deposit of my monthly benefits checks. All have refused, while one is considering providing me with a mail deposit. I made those requests to simplify my life, and the insurance companies will not comply. I assume their refusal is based on their desire to have the money paid to me, "float," for their benefit. I have no concern regarding the insurance companies finances, I paid insurance premiums for up to 23 years so that I could protect myself. Please ask the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission if they would consider ordering a public company to wire transfer money into the account of an insured who cannot handle checks because of a disability. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) orders businesses that serve the public to make accommodations for the benefit of disabled persons. I would rather not be disabled, but since the EEOC was unable to assist me, I am now at home attempting to live on my insurance benefits. Your prompt action in forwarding this request to the EEOC for a decision is appreciated. Thank you very much. XX Yours truly, XX 01-03382

XX M.D., M.B.A. New City, NY XX Simple Telephone XX Caller Controlled Voice Mail/Facsimile Machine XX June 13, 1994 Honorable Benjamin Gilman United States House of Representatives 2185 Rayburn Building Washington, D.C. 20515-3222 Facsimile (202) 225-2541 ATTN: Jason Epstein Dear Mr. Gilman, Despite my poor vision I have been fortunate to find parts of our 1989 Form 1040 and some of the correspondence with the IRS that relates to our payment of approximately $9,200 last spring, payment that was coerced from us despite our having paid that money in a timely manner in 1989 and 1990. The reason for the IRS demanding the principal, interest and penalties is that one of their employees incorrectly keyed our tax form into their computer. I entered on our 1989 Form 1040 that I had paid $7,000 with a request for an extension that was filed on time in 1990. I have even provided you with copies of both sides of that check. What happened is the IRS employee entered the $7,000 on line 60, rather than line 59 where we correctly entered it. That is why the IRS could not find the money that we claimed as having paid. Revenue Agent Anthony J. Stabile, had in front of him the Form 1040 as well as the computerized print out. He was either too stupid to compare the Form 1040 with the computer print out, or he did and didn't care to act properly by correcting the computer print out. What is most interesting is that all his supervisors and superiors had the same opportunity to see the glaring error, but they also let it pass through undetected. It should have been evident to all the personnel involved in our audit and to the personnel who prepared Mr. Alexander's June 22, 1993 letter to you, which you forwarded to us, that entering $7,000 as a claim for overpayment of FICA taxes is very unusual, and perhaps there was an error. No one, including the District Director, had the least discomfort with accusing us of entering $7,000 as a claim for overpayment of FICA taxes. No one made the effort to determine if there was an error. Only the IRS had the original Form 1040, we had already notified Mr. Stabile that we could no longer locate our copy.

In the letter dated June 22, 1993 Mr. Alexander repeated the idiotic statement that we had entered $7,000 on line 60. Anyone with half a brain should have recognized the stupidity of that statement. If the IRS wishes to confirm my statements your 01-03383 office can provide Mr. Alexander with a copy of his letter and they can review the copy of our Form 1040 in the possession of Mr. Hank Rummell the accountant who prepared our return that year. Mr. Rummell has not cooperated with us in any manner during this matter and he demanded and received his fee before he would meet with the Revenue Agent. Mr. Rummell was party to an error in a prior year tax return and that was why he no longer did our returns in January 1993. I am overwhelmed that even with your assistance in this matter the District Director was incapable of recognizing the nonsense that was published over his signature. I would like you to contact the IRS in its national headquarters and ask them to investigate the whole matter of our 1989 Form 1040 and the manner in which we were coerced into paying money that we had already paid. Each employee is responsible for the quality of his/her work output and I have now identified a whole chain of employees, including the District Director who were careless, perhaps even intentionally in error, and who allowed this injustice to be perpetrated on us. We deserve an apology as well as a refund of our money and interest on it. I am very concerned that we will become targets of the IRS with perpetual audits and other forms of harassment. We overpaid our 1989 taxes, and there were no adjustments in our 1990 and 1991 taxes after the audit by Agent Stabile. I seek your assistance in providing us a barrier from future harassing actions. I remain available to assist the IRS in disciplining any employee who was involved in our 1989 Form 1040 key entry and the audit and was party to the repeated errors made at many levels. This is not a matter which I am willing to forget. We were subjected to coercion, harassment, stupidity, ridicule, and the denial of access to a considerable amount of money for more than one year. Ms. Sabb of the Manhattan Problem Resolution Office of the IRS told me that in 30 years of working for the IRS she had never heard of a complete file being lost, everything is gone into some, "Black Hole," at the IRS. I remain suspicious that some IRS employee intentionally trashed our file realizing that an error of monumental stupidity had been made, and the loss of the file would prevent us from recognizing what had happened. I wish the IRS Inspector General be provided with all our letters to you. With whatever the Manhattan and White Plains IRS offices

can provide he should investigate whether the loss of our file may have been intended to prevent anyone from learning of the chain of errors that resulted in our being forced to pay money that had already been collected. The Inspector General should review whether the IRS should have acted more aggressively to subpoena files, checks, banking records, etc., in order to have brought this matter to an earlier conclusion. I would like to discuss these matters with the Inspector General in a face to face meeting to be able to provide him/her with my experiences and feelings about this case. I suspect a criminal conspiracy to cover up the chain of significant errors surrounding our 1989 01-03384​ Form 1040 handling. What adds to my belief that our experience in 1993 was a criminal conspiracy is the actions NOT taken by the IRS. If I had claimed the $7,000 as an overpayment of FICA taxes in 1989 then the IRS should have referred this case for a criminal investigation. If I had made such a ridiculous claim, that would have been perjury and should have been construed as a criminal attempt to defraud the IRS of taxes owed. The lack of a criminal referral further adds to my suspicions that there was more than one IRS employee who conspired to defraud us of our money. Certainly many employees were careless, including the District Director, and did not perform their duties properly. Perhaps the District Director will contact the office that would have been requested to initiated a criminal investigation to learn if our 1989 Form 1040 file was forwarded to them. I am unable to express in words the anger I feel. Now I better understand why my former employers had no concern regarding my charges to the EEOC. They had prior experience dealing with the EEOC and they could reliably predict that the EEOC would never be able to act to protect me because it is staffed with personnel who had previously been employed at the IRS. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) contains Section 503 and 504 that require the withholding of all federal funds if an employer is found guilty of discrimination in defiance of the ADA. Please remember that my EEOC file was in a black hole at the EEOC for more than two months and would have remained there forever if I hadn't called to seek action. Perhaps I misunderstand, maybe EEOC employees are subsequently transferred to the IRS after they prove that they can successfully misplace whole files. The two agencies used to be housed together at 90 Church Street and I can now see that an employee at one agency could feel perfectly comfortable if they got off the elevator at the other agency's floor. Considering the quality of work and the non-existent review of the quality of employee work output

demonstrated by both agencies in my recent interactions, I am not even sure that the employee would realize that they hadn't arrived at their proper work location. I am enclosing another copy of both sides of the check that I used to pay the IRS $7,000 when we applied for an extension to file our 1989 Form 1040. Please forward to me a copy of your letter to the EEOC Inspector General so that I will have a better understanding of how they cover over their mistakes. Perhaps the only instance when something comes out of a, "Black Hole," at one Federal Agency is when the Inspector General seeks answers to questions, and perhaps not even then. XX Yours truly, XX enclosure 01-03385 , M.D., M.B.A.