Free Money From Facebook

[yogi]

I told you several months ago about my shock when I received a check from Facebook as settlement of a class action law suit regarding their use of my biometric information. I got a second check recently and the total of the two was around $400. Not bad for being tagged without my permission. A second class action lawsuit is in the courts and this is is about privacy. Anybody who used that site since 2007 on forward is entitled to make a claim. So ... I did. And, apparently you can too. Here is the link explaining it all wherein there is a link to file a claim.

https://facebookuserprivacysettlement.com/

[Kellemora]

Thanks for this!
The link you gave takes me to a valid page, but the links on that page take me to a website which was closed.
No problem though, I used Google and got to the submissions page, filled it out, now we'll see what happens.

[yogi]

I got the original article and link off of Twitter. It looked the same as the link I gave you, but apparently it was different because mine worked all the way through the process. The settlement from Meta is something like $750 million of which 25% goes to the lawyers handling this suit. The remaining funds will be distributed to all the claimants, which means the more people that claim, the less each one will receive. So, keep this information to yourself. LOL The other factor to determine the amount is the time you have been a participant on Facebook. I was there at the beginning of this suit, 2007, so whatever the max payout is I should get it.

The last class action suit was handled by the same group of lawyers. In the original announcement they figured we would all get around $225, but I ended up with nearly $400 because so many people did not make a claim and court costs were less than anticipated. That first settlement sum was something like $350 million if I recall correctly. So this jackpot is double and with any luck the checks we get could be close to $750. The down side is that the checka won't arrive this year. Expect them early next year.

I hope my guesstimates are right mostly for your benefit. But heck, even if the check is only $7.50, that would be greatly appreciated. It's nowhere near adequate compensation for all the damage Facebook has caused, but at least it is something.

[Kellemora]

I'm glad you told me about it, else I probably would have never heard about it.
I've been in several class action lawsuits, and filled out the paperwork I got in the mail.
But I think on most of them, the largest payouts I ever got were like $4.00 and $7.50 is all.
Which didn't even cover the time it took to dig up the info they requested and fill out the forms.

I had an aunt die recently, and each of us cousins were supposed to get around 2,000 bucks each.
However, one cousin who was handling her affairs suddenly came up with a new will showing it was all left to him and his wife, and three of his friends. The rest of us were cut out of it due to this. He got around 250k and his wife 125k, and his friends about 50k each.
We tried to stop it, but didn't succeed. He got her to sign a new will three days before she died, when she was in no shape to be signing anything.

[yogi]

Inheritance is a bloody proposition. I've been involved with a couple situations like yours and quietly just signed my rights away to keep the peace. My guess is you would have a good case to dispute a will made out three days before your aunt's passing, but would it be worth the time and effort? My first instinct would be no, it's not worth it', but to cheat the cheaters would be an excellent kind of Karma. You would think some honor would be given to the deceased person's last wishes, but I've seen time and time again where the family gets greedy and blood thirsty where inheritances are involved.

I'm done with X-Corp and its Twitter. Well maybe not completely done. I still read it once in a while to see how things are going there. Only a few of my quality contacts remain there, and I don't know for how long that will last. This bit about Facebook would seem to please the likes of E Musk which is why I am not surprised it was allowed to be published there. But, then, too, it's a big story and can be found in many different news outlets. At least it was big on the day it was announced. We probably won't hear anymore about it until August when they close the claim period. I truly don't know what will come of this class action, but I was very blessed and surprised with the last one. That paid off because I was an Illinois resident at the time, but this one is for everybody. I don't see a lot of talk about it, and as far as payouts go that is a good thing. Hopefully you and I will be the only two claimants. Half of $500 million would make me feel better about Facebook. LOL

[Kellemora]

I agree, it has happened many times in my family among the various relatives.

I haven't had any problems on Twitter, in fact, it seems to be getting better and better.

Class action lawsuits, regardless of how much money they get, the attorneys get the lions share, and the rest is watered down by having so many claimants.

[yogi]

The lawyers in a class action get a certain percentage of the settlement. That is SOP for any punitive damage suits. The Illinois suit limited the attorney's fees to 25% of the pot, but I got a second distribution about a year after the initial payout. The second check was settlement monies not distributed nor spent. Thus I think there is a limit to what the lawyers can charge, but they do not always reach that limit. In any case you are correct about the percentage going to administer the suit is greater than the percentage paid to any one claimant.

Truth be told I have not had any problems on Twitter either. It's just become totally unreliable and probably will crash and burn given enough time.

[Kellemora]

I think Missouri was 20% as attorney fees, but this was after they took out all the expenses they incurred first. Like printing and mailing costs for the paperwork they sent out, the fees to file the claim in court, and whatever other expenses they had.

I think you just liked Twitter better when the Demonrats had free reign of the place and most of the Patriots tweets were blocked.

[yogi]

My wife broke a leg on one of the commuter trains going to work one day. After two years, before the statute of limitations expired, she got a letter from the railroad offering her a settlement. It didn't seem like nearly enough so we went to the family lawyer to get him involved. He gladly took on the case and was able to extract more than 30% additional money for the settlement. That was nice, but his fee was 33% of the settlement figure. It all sort of makes you wonder what kind of tacit agreement is in place between insurance companies and lawyers.

Not that it matters, but you don't spend enough time on Twitter to recognize what's going on there. Then again you also are viewing the platform from the Red Zone. All perfectly understandable.

[Kellemora]

Did I ever tell you about my late wife's credit cards, and how we paid insurance on them that if she died, they were covered?
Well, before she died, she placed several orders for Christmas presents, which of course are not sent until right before Christmas. In many cases, the charges were not made until right before the orders shipped.
As it turns out, when you have CC insurance, the insurance company does NOT pay the balance owing. They only make interest free payments, the minimum required by the CC company at the time of death, and it is frozen at this amount.
However, there is a clause that if I use the credit card, then the insurance is no good. Understood, but I didn't.
When those charges for Christmas gifts appeared, this also ended the insurance company paying anything.
And I got slapped with two judgments and had to appear in court. I told the judge, I did not make any charges on those cards, so I am not libel for the balance. But the judge said, yes I am because charges were made after her death. Even the judge said it doesn't seem fair, but the law is written to side with the CC companies.
FWIW: I never paid a dime on those judgments, and they spent a bunch more money trying to collect from me, for years.
I guess they finally gave up after about 7 years, or whatever the statue of limitations happened to be. Even so, it still appears I have two judgments against me on my credit record. Which didn't bother me none, hi hi.

On Twitter, I only look at the people I follow, and not much of anything else. The account is not under my name but under my pen name so I can help my book promoter promote books by liking and sharing them.

[yogi]

I noted that an account under the name Brad Manzo tagged your pen name account on Twitter. It was just a shout out, but I was impressed.

I have heard there is such a thing as credit card insurance, but honestly, I never looked into it. Charges for online purchases vary depending on who you order from. Some places bill the card immediately upon placing the order, while other do not apply the charges until the item has shipped. Then there ere those who issue a temporary charge, sometimes greater than the order amount, and then refund it prior to shipping. At that point they apply the actual charge which is permanent. Buying gas on a credit card worked that way for a long time. They would bill you something like $100 before you started pumping the gas. I can understand why they do that, but it's hard to comprehend why legitimate sellers online would do the same thing.

The judgments against you can't be good for your credit record. Usually bad debts fall off the record after a certain amount of time, but I am fairly certain court judgments do not. Then again, what does it matter if you can use your credit cards as if nothing happened? Which brings to mind another point about insurance. The credit card company has insurance to protect them against uncollected debts, debt insurance. The insurance companies pay that mount in full. Then, too, the credit card companies pay a high premium for that kind of protection.

[Kellemora]

I share all of Brad's posts, so he always includes me in his list of shares and likes.
I really don't know the guy, is he somebody important?

Yes, it is popular at gas stations, cash n carry stores, and a few places where you don't know the final price.
Such as if they will add shipping after they figure how much the order weighs.
A few restaurants do that now too. You have to give them a credit card before you place your order.
Especially those that now use Kiosk ordering stations.

Back when i was buying a lot of houses, I used to laugh at some lenders who wanted to know what my credit score was. Apparently they were not that heavily into mortgage banking, hi hi
Your credit score goes down by 50 to 100 points for each mortgage you are holding. On the day I closed on 6 houses, my credit score was only like 150 or something like that, and a negative number after I closed on all of them, hi hi.
I went to buy another truck, and I did want to finance about half of it. They ran a credit report and the guy told me he had never seen a credit score of absolute zero before. They couldn't make the loan through whoever they use. I told the guy, no problem, how much of a discount do I get for paying in cash, hi hi. I told the guy, credit scores are meaningless if one is in the real estate industry. There they look at tangible assets, not credit scores.

[yogi]

Agreed. Credit is not exactly the same as a loan, although people tend to think of them in the same light. The problem is that you can't avoid being associated with a credit rating. It's a risk factor that goes into a formula to determine how trustworthy you are to pay back the loan. It doesn't take a math genius to know that any number multiplied by zero equals zero. That's not good when it comes to assessing risk for a credit transaction. Banks have to rely on statistics, such as credit scores, in order to conduct their business. Those statistics do not give a complete story, but them are the rules like it or not.

I don't know Brad and have no idea how important he is. I follow you on the Twitter account for this website and that is how I saw your name being mentioned. I only follow a few people from the @Brainformation account so that it's easy for me to tell when your pen name is published. My timeline here is very short and sometimes doesn't move for several successive days. My personal account is a whole different story.

[Kellemora]

Mortgage Brokers are a little bit different than banks. They don't look at your Credit Score, but they do carefully scrutinize your payment history on existing mortgages, and where the money comes from to pay on those mortgages. Plus the asset has to be worth much more than the loan you are requesting. But once you have been in the business for a while, it gets easier and easier to obtain the money to buy more properties. Especially when those properties have long-term tenants in place in them, and we are taking over ownership of those houses and keeping them as-is as far as the tenant is concerned. In actuality, we are buying those homes as inventory for our renovation business, but the renovation business doesn't take possession until the tenant moves out on their own. There are major tax breaks to doing it that way. It keeps the basis for the property stable, which is a plus when it comes to selling the property after renovation. The lower the basis, the more you pay in income tax on the sale.

I don't do much of anything on Twitter, other than hit like and share the books my book promoter puts up.

[yogi]

Credit scores are pretty much a tool for retail business. I suppose it would be suspicious if you had a bad personal credit rating but good references with commercial loans. The truth is that people dealing with large amounts of money, such as what it takes to buy real estate, can afford it. Retail customers are a big unknown for the most part, thus the credit scores come in handy there. Regardless, there are shady folks in both worlds and it's incumbent upon the lender to vet out their customers thoroughly.

In the world of equities it's best to keep the cost bases in line with the current market value, which seems counter intuitive because most investors want to make a killing in the market. The taxes on equity sales is similar to the taxes on real property, i.e., you pay on the profit. That' is why you need to keep track of the cost basis.

It's interesting to note that the renovators do not take possession of the properties in their inventories unless the permanent tenant moves out voluntarily. It seems to me that if it's in your inventory, you own it. But what do I know about tax laws? LOL

[Kellemora]

When I went to help buy my son his car, it was the bank who at first glance at my credit score said I couldn't co-sign for him, but then he looked closer and he's the one who told me that every mortgage over 4 (I think it's 5 myself) drops your credit score by 50 points, so upon a closer observation, he said my actual adjusted credit score was above 750, then he let the loan go through, and at a lower interest rate too.
My biggest shock was after I sold every house I owned, and moved south, when I went to buy that first derelict house to fix up, the banker just saw I had paid off numerous mortgages, so he didn't bat an eye at the small amount I requested to buy materials that are going into the house. Down here, the land a house sits on often has more value than with a house on it, hi hi.

Folks who take a deduction for a home office, don't realize this reduces the basis on their house, and in the long run, they pay it all back in higher taxes when they do sell. This is one reason I've never claimed any business deductions for rent I paid for the storage buildings or my office in the garage. I also claim all of my equipment as personal equipment, because down here if you claim it as business equipment to depreciate it, it puts you in a totally different tax bracket, which is not good. Back home, your company could own equipment, and you could depreciate it, regardless of where it was located. But you still couldn't use it for personal use, although everybody does. It is also the reason I've always kept 4 to 8 computers up and running. The company owned four and I owned all the rest. I had a dedicated phone line to my stand-alone FAX machines also.

It is two separate inventories. One is the houses as rental units, the other is houses bought empty for renovation.
But yes, the same company owns all the houses. But rentals are an income producing investment, while vacant properties are an upkeep expense with time limits on them. If you buy a house for renovation, and don't show work is being done on it within 90 days, even if you are keeping the grass mowed, and dumped trash picked up, there are many laws they can nail you with.
For example: Every house MUST HAVE connections to the Utilities, namely, electric, water, and sewer, plus gas if it has any gas appliances or furnace in it. If it is a rental house, naturally all these things are on, and only water and sewer is covered by the landlord, the tenant pays for the electric and gas. But on a vacant property, you pay for all the utilities services, whether they are turned on or not. Oh, and before you can get them turned on, they must pass inspections on each.

This is why when I bought a house for renovation, the first things I did was install new doors and windows, and placed mini-blinds in all the windows. This way work is being done. Then I go about getting the wiring up to code, even if I plan on replacing all the old wiring anyhow. I remove all outdoor faucets, and only have water to the kitchen and bathroom and get it inspected, so I can have the water turned on. Need that Toilet working, hi hi. But the key here is, it shows work is being done, even if most of it is only demolition work. There is activity when the inspectors drive by, and they do, often.

[yogi]

Claiming business space in a home residence is a dual edge sword. The reason to claim that space is to reduce current taxes. At the end of the day when you sell the house the profit is greater and so are the taxes. If you amortize the higher tax at the time of sale over the term in which you claimed the deduction you will be able to see which method is less costly. The problem is that you don't know what profit, if any, you will make when you sell the house and thus don't know if the increased tax rate is worth it or not. The same problem arises with IRA accounts. They want you to liquidate it over a period of time so that the taxes are less. Well, I'm not so sure that the total of all those lesser taxes each year would be less than a single hit from emptying the IRA all at one time. That too depends on the current tax schedules so that timing is everything.

I think I could enjoy renovating homes, but the business aspects of it all is insane. That seems to be particularly true when you do business in more than one state. The laws are crazy different depending on location. In my old age with a fixed income I want to keep my current expenses low and have no outstanding debts (which is why I pay off the credit card each month). When I leave this planet there will be taxes to be paid on this house and I could go through some trouble to assure they are minimal. But, then, I won't be here when all that happens and the government can take the whole damned house at that point. My only concern is for my wife's well being should I depart before she does, and even that is not much of a problem. The house will remain hers until she dies too. As far as inheritance goes, the kids are doing well enough on their own. If I have something to leave them, that would be great. If all my possessions come to a net zero value, they won't be losing anything they have earned.

I don't need something like future potential taxes to complicate my life.

[Kellemora]

It's best not to deduct a room in your house for business. It is safer in the long run too.

Don't get me going about IRA's. I don't have or want one. But Debi had one, and it has been a nightmare the entire time she had it. We checked the rules very carefully and she was allowed to pay some of her sons college tuition from her IRA. But what they don't tell you is, you have to have THEM issue the check to the college, not do it on your own, else not only do you pay a penalty for early withdrawal, they tax what you took big time. She got burned twice on that deal too, even the time they are the ones who cut the check to the college. Part of the fee was for the required Dorm fees. Those you can't take out of the IRA. So, more penalties and taxes. She started taking the money out and/or moving it to other things, as she could. But it wasn't long before it was all gone.

If your kids are doing well, it may be in your, and their, best interest to give the house to them. There is a method to doing this though so they do not incur any inheritance taxes. You can have their names added to your deed. After that, you have to wait 30 days before you can remove your names from the deed. Then there is a 5-year waiting period before the house is officially theirs. In other words, if you end up with medical bills and government assisted care during that time, then their will be a lien on the house that has to be paid. But if you and your wife live another 5 years, all is good.
Since women usually live longer than men, except in my historical case, hi hi. It is best to remove your name and leave her name on the deed, then select only ONE of the kids to put their name on the deed. Your Will can handle how the house will be handled by that person, either sold or leased out, etc. But your other children all have an equal share of the proceeds.
But the main thing about doing this is, they will own the house, so when you die, they did not inherit the house, so there is no inheritance tax, which is some cases is over 46% for the government. And if you were sick the government usually gets the whole house in exchange for your medical bills.

[yogi]

You got me to thinking, so I decided to consult with an artificially intelligent robot for some enlightenment ...

• In the state of Missouri, when do you pay inheritance tax
  
  The good news is that the State of Missouri does not have an inheritance tax, according to sources. However, you may still owe inheritance taxes to another state, depending on the state's laws and your individual circumstances.
  ______________________________________________________
• Do I have to pay inheritance tax to the federal government
  
  The federal government does not currently have an inheritance tax at the national level, so you would not have to pay inheritance tax to the federal government when you inherit assets from a relative in the State of Missouri. However, as I mentioned earlier, you may still owe inheritance taxes to another state depending on their laws and your individual circumstances. It is always best to consult with a licensed tax professional or attorney to understand any tax implications of an inheritance.

I got curious because I did not have to pay any inheritance tax when mom passed. I was living in Illinois then, and she did not own real estate. Her furniture, her car, and some cash was inherited, but the tax preparer for that year didn't think I owed inheritance tax. It's been 15 years since that happened and the IRS has not audited me yet.

In principle it would be a shame for the house, my asset of greatest value, to be confiscated by the tax collector. Insuring that does not happen might be prudent, but it would be no real loss to anyone. The children have their own estates and are both doing well so that any inheritance would just add to their good fortunes, literally. If they were denied the assets I own, they lose nothing. They simply won't gain something they did not earn by their own effort. I hear you saying, yeah but, why give it to the government? Why not? I will have no use for it when I turn into fertilizer.

The glitch in my logic is that both kids happen to live in states other than Missouri. I don't know the laws in Florida, and the one in Illinois won't have a problem. I'm trying to get them to move to Missouri, but they seem to have some strange notions about this place. LOL

Well, I don't want to get you going regarding IRA's. Wife and I were more or less forced to open IRA accounts when we were employed. The contributions stopped when we retired. Since mine wasn't much I took it all at one payout but wife left hers to mature. A couple years ago she was required by law to start withdrawing. She has a custodian, a stock broker, to take care of all that. We get statements when they make withdrawals and try to keep track of where they are depositing our funds. That's it. Perhaps at some point when the balance gets low enough I can convince her to take out the remainder and eat the taxes on that. It's a gamble. Will the balance diminish to that point before she dies? I guess we will find out.

You got into some sticky areas of IRA law when you decided to pay college tuition from your wife's IRA account. It can be done, but as you point out there are a slew of laws and regulations. I'm sure all the loopholes you fell into could have been discovered ahead of time, but nobody in their right mind understands legalese. Not sure even lawyers do.

[Kellemora]

Interesting, I wonder when they stopped it?
Here in TN there is no inheritance tax anymore, IF the inheritance is under 1 million dollars.
However, if you Sell what you inherited, then you will owe Capital Gains taxes.
We did the deed switcheroo when Debi's mom was near death, but she held out past the 5-year requirement, and in the end, died at home under the care of in-home hospice services, which were covered by her insurance.

When my cousin inherited her mothers house, they had to sell it to cover the inheritance tax.
A double edge sword, because the sale also brought in the capital gains tax.
She ended up with only 54% of the amount the house sold for, all the rest went to taxes.