As a first-time homebuyer, Elizabeth Thorn thought she was being cautious.
The 26-year-old scrimped and saved for her down payment, working overtime, weekends and holidays.
It was with immense pride that she closed on a gut-rehab condo in West Town in August 2008.
The warm glow of homeownership wore off seven months later when she received her first property tax bill from the Cook County treasurer’s office.
The bill, for the first half of 2008, was a bit higher than Thorn had anticipated. Instead of charging her the $666.53 in taxes for her unit, the county sent her the bill for the entire building, or $4,727.15.
After her head stopped spinning, she called her mortgage lender, Chase Home Finance, and asked it to pay just her portion of the tax bill. Thorn also contacted the treasurer’s office and began the process of splitting her property index number from the rest of the building.
She thought her calls would temporarily halt the process, allowing her time to sort things out.
Instead, on June 4, Chase paid the entire $4,727.15 from her escrow account.
Thorn said she called Chase in a panic and asked why it had made the payment despite promises that it wouldn’t.
“They simply said that the bill was in my name, they had received another copy from the treasurer’s office, and they pay it when it is due,” Thorn said.
Frustrated, she began the process of trying to obtain a refund from the county, while also dealing with Chase. At one point, she said, the treasurer’s office told her she needed to track down all the other owners in her building and obtain: 1) proof that they had paid their property taxes, and 2) letters in support of her getting a refund.
“This all sounded ridiculous,” Thorn said. “But when they have $4,000 of your money and all the power, you have to go by what they tell you.”
So she slogged on, running into wall after wall in the process. While she tried to track down all the required information, her second installment tax bill arrived. Again, she was billed for the entire building — a whopping $4,821.97.
On Nov. 4, Chase paid Thorn’s portion of the bill, $679.88. It then inexplicably made a second payment to the county from Thorn’s escrow account — for the entire $4,821.97.
Again, Thorn called Chase, and was able to get the bank to reverse the $4,821.97 payment.
She could not convince either Chase or the treasurer’s office to return the original overpayment of more than $4,000.
At her wits’ end, Thorn e-mailed What’s Your Problem?
Thorn said she had three options. She could continue to harass Chase into fixing the problem, she could sue the treasurer’s office or she could give up and forget about the $4,000.
“It’s gotten to the point where I feel like there is no possibility of ever getting my money back, and as though I will have wasted more time and energy than can be quantified,” she said in her e-mail.
The Problem Partner, Kristin Samuelson, called Bob Benjamin, spokesman for the Cook County treasurer’s office, on April 15. The treasurer’s office quickly contacted Chase about Thorn’s case.
Peter Karahalios, chief legal counsel for the treasurer’s office, said Chase did not follow instructions given to it by Thorn.
“I spoke with the people over at Chase after reviewing the letter from Ms. Thorn,” he said. “It’s clear that Chase did not follow the proper procedure. They recognized there was a mistake that they made and they’ll now be crediting Ms. Thorn’s account.”
On April 16, a representative from Chase Home Finance called Thorn and apologized for the mix-up. The representative promised to return the overpaid property tax money.
Happy but not completely satisfied, Thorn told the representative she also deserved to get interest on the missing money. The representative agreed.
Six days later, Thorn received two checks from Chase, one for the original overpayment of $4,060.62, and another for $100 in interest.
“I deposited the checks today and it’s all taken care of,” Thorn said Monday. “I feel great about it. I thought this would never get resolved.”
Even better, she now has her own property index number, meaning she will no longer be billed for the property taxes of all six units in her building.
“To my knowledge, that shouldn’t be a problem again,” she said.
