Scientology, despite policy and promises to the contrary, does NOT return funds, even for unused services. This is “money on account” paid in advance for services to be taken in the future. Scientology offers discounts (and the threat of “price rises”) as incentives to encourage people to turn over their money now with the promise that it will be held in trust until such time as the person is ready and able to participate in the course or auditing.
It used to be routine that scientology would return this money with little fuss, as long as the person understood that they would no longer be eligible to participate in scientology. But once they figured out they could tie people up with having to go through sham “arbitration,” even if only asking for return of money they never used, they closed up shop. You can read an earlier post, citing all the Hubbard and other references, here: Scientology Refunds and Repayments: We Don’t Do That Any More
Someone recently mentioned to me they had included their money on account in their will. This may be a solution. And while you still won’t get it, perhaps someone else you care about can after you are gone.
I don’t know if it will work, but suspect it might. Fighting with probate/bankruptcy courts is not usually successful if you are trying not to disgorge funds that you took from a person. There have been earlier instances where scientology has recognized they would not win trying to hang onto the money and turned it over without a fight (I am familiar with this happening in bankruptcy proceedings). Your heirs didn’t sign any sort of agreement concerning the money, but they are entitled to it as directed in your will.
There is nothing to be lost by including whatever money you have on account in your estate planning. It might be recovered for your heirs.
Just passing on what I thought might be a workable idea ans a public service Any probate lawyers out there can weigh in if they agree or disagree.
What about considering a lien against the money. As an example, someone who has left Scn “owes” me money and therefore I take a lien on his assets which specifically is the money held “in trust” by Scn. As this person “doesn’t pay” I then call in my lien and on Scn for the full repayment. If Scientology doesn’t pay up I can consider taking action to recover “my money”. Just a thought to get the money back before we go to that big ideal org in the sky. I understand that Scn would not have a say on the lien but someone more in the “know” could clarify.
Surely the absolutely perfect ‘circle of life’ action would be for anyone who was willing to request that the money on account is to be donated to The Aftermath Foundation to help other people leaving or have left and need help getting back on their feet…
Remenbering an attorney in Clearwater 1983 that helped people with the above. Don´t remember his name and won´t find it in my archive at the moment. I got about 5K back and my overall feeling of it was it was easy peasy and it didn´t cost much either. Just sent him a letter from Sweden and a relatively short time after I had the money transferred to my bank.
Perhaps somebody here knows his name and what happened to him? Fair gamed or?
Wasn’t that Graham Berry?
https://tonyortega.org/2019/08/29/another-legal-fight-brewing-over-scientologys-refusal-to-return-future-payments/
No I don´t think it was Graham B. He seems to been a Californian all the the time and I guess his stories with cult in the 80’s would have been mentioned by the Cult itself from their “fan-page ” of his.
https://www.whoisgrahamberry.com/
Perhaps this won’t make much difference, but from a financial standpoint for a company or organization, partial or full advance payments that have not yet been delivered are typically recorded as “Deferred Revenue” on the liability side of the balance sheet. I believe this is the case worldwide.
So technically, all scn orgs in the world are in debt, insolvent, and defaulting. But they continue to bring in money and increase their liabilities. This is an example of the big lrh tech that will help them to clear the galaxy.
And isn’t it also the case that non-collected Freeloader bills would have to show up on the asset side of their balancesheets? These bills being issued by the cult certainly look ‘official’ and are quite detailed listing the specific courses and auditing. Yet, we know they will never legally enforce payment. It’s just another example that their official accounting is dishonest.
Exactly, the F/L’s is also an important point. And if we want to be honest, there are also inter-org bills, which are also a huge mountain to tackle. Technically, an activity like scn is a 360-degree financial risk for the society.
If any company, organization, or even a family-run business were managed in that way, it would go bankrupt within a few months and they would end up in legal trouble (trying to be optimistic). They keep going by pulling in money from some unsuspecting individuals, but their condition continues to deteriorate, and they don’t care at all. As you ay their official accounting s dishonest and perhaps the IRS should start looking into these solvency situations.
Each of the orgs is a legal entity on their own and these inter-org billings are actively being used.
In OEC Volume 3, SCIENTOLOGY ORGS TAX AND BALANCE SHEETS, he explains how a corporations balancesheet must always show sufficient debts to avoid becoming taxable for any profit having been made. Could also be called creative accounting or tax avoidance.
“… when one makes INCOME be sure it is accounted for as to its source and that one covers it with expenses and debts. Handling taxation is as simple as that.”
This is an LRH policy so cannot ever be changed! It’s a MUST for every org.
This is exactly what happens. Every org owes hundreds of thousands if not millions to “management” for their brilliant guidance and use of the films and to FSO and other higher orgs for training. They are all insolvent.
Mike, wow. Even though I worked in finance, I’ve only just come to understand it now. This reveals the true face of scn, a diabolical scheme deliberately crafted to evade taxes and accumulate money as much as possible. And the most malicious part is intentionally leaving staff and orgs to struggle in this murky water and insolvency, as it serves the “purpose”. Again, wow.
Actually orgs used to keep a stat called TAP (Total unused Advanced Payments) and it was considered a bad thing to have this stat “increasing”. But that was back when the CoS gave refunds easily so it was considered a liability accounting wise back then.
(Historic note) Int Management’s push to get rid of AOLA’s HUGE TAP was part of the impetus behind Mike Silverman honoring all those prepurchased OT packages at original prices that got him busted.
What a great idea, Mike. I need to be redoing my living trust very soon and I am going to incorporate this into it.
Question: When the C.O.S. negotiations with the I.R.S. resulted in their being granted religious non-profit status, wasn’t it part of the agreement that were to give a refund to anyone who reqested one?
If so, could one petition to the IRS to ask them to enforce the agreement?
Good Q. If you read the earlier post I linked to above it not only includes the Hubbard references, but also the specific representation made to the IRS about returning monies. They don’t follow either.
The IRS doesn’t collect personal debts unless owed to them.
Great work once again, Mike!
Now that’s forward thinking! It’s like the timeshare we bought in the 90’s – ONLY death will get us out of it. Accountants want to call it an “asset” but you (we) can’t even GIVE it away 😂. Here’s hoping a few folks can get their money back before they start adding new hoops that include that scenario (assuming there were any fresh faces signing up these days 🥴)
Mike, I wonder what would happen if someone tried to designate unused money on account with Scientology to allay a tax debt owed to the IRS? “Hey, IRS–I don’t have the dough to pay my IRS debt, but Scientology has a bunch of my money you could go after . . . !”
This is helpful. I’m glad you took the time to address this.