Linda's Litigation Options

[Shiny Penny]

Fran, Wow! Thank you for taking the time to provide the links, details and interpretations of the data found. I'm writing a rather long, detailed and technical response, in part because your post was also detailed. I haven't had the chance to check all of what you sent me, but I did check the 2001 990. The auditor's concerns (as reported in the lawsuit documents) and what you had posted - gravely concerned, even alarmed, me. But, as I show below, there is no reason to be alarmed - at least not about the 990 in 2001.

The 990 states (and please correct me if I am wrong) - the information posted in Statement 2 (page 17):
So I went back to part 1, Line 20 and that line reads "Other changes in net assets or fund balances (attach explanation)"

I interpret this to mean that this 990 is correcting prior mistakes/errors and sometime in 2001 3ABN had recorded the previously unrecorded split interest agreements and also recorded the unrealized gains on marketable securities. To go into a little more detail on the unrealized gains - these gains were described as unrealized. Meaning that the end of year value of the securities was greater than the beginning of year value, but the marketable securities had not been sold during the year - hence the gain is unrealized. This is a paper gain that should have been recorded in an earlier year (2000?), but had not been. It seems to me that you are familiar with accounting and so would know that prior period adjustments (such as this unrealized gain) are made directly to retained earnings in the case of a corporation and in the case of not for profit organization would be an adjustment to the fund balance. Which is exactly what 3ABN did. Therefore, I am relieved to see that 3ABN had made the correction to the prior periods error!

About the amounts due to other ministries, according to the the 990 these amounts had previously been classified as temporarily restricted and were now being reclassified to something else. I didn't see what they were being classified to, but since this amount is in parenthesis (meaning it is being subtracted) would indicate that in this correction 3ABN was removing that amount from its fund balance. To get a bit technical here (and probably lose the rest of the readers who would have gotten even this far in my post) we know that the debit was to some restricted account (I assume restricted cash) and was improperly credited to some account (such as donations or something similar) that increased the fund balance. I supposed that this is an easy enough mistake to make and part of the reason books are audited - to find material errors and misstatements. Anyway, the good news is the auditors caught the mistake and that 3ABN made the correction in 2001 as is reported in the 990.

These are perfectly good explanations for what happened. You are correct when you said "3ABN did not post $2.45 MILLION Dollars in TRUST FUNDS in 2001." Well at least partly correct, the year would have been 2000 or earlier. The 990 shows that they corrected this in 2001.

But when you say "They also mis-posted over $14,000 of money meant to be forwarded to other Independent Ministries. The funds went straight into the 3ABN coffers. I still wonder what Ministries did not get their money" I beg to differ. Truth be said, of course the money went straight into 3ABN's coffers. It was sent to 3ABN and would go into their coffers before going out of the 3ABN coffers into another ministry's coffers. We don't have any indication that any ministry did not get its money in 2000 - we only know that 3ABN did not record the receipt of the cash properly. In other words, we know that 3ABN made a mistake with the accounting when the cash came into the coffers. This tells us nothing about any transaction transferring the money out of the coffers. And again the 990 tells us that in 2001 3ABN made the correction to its books.

I'll have to take the time to investigate the other points you brought up, to see if 3ABN is correcting mistakes, or just making them and leaving them be. But so far the verdict is the 3ABN is making the corrections.

God bless.

Shiney Penny (now starting to follow the money around)

Stan (I am responding to you comments on another thread) - nearly a year ago I responded to the repititious statements of Fran about the accounting at 3ABN. I beg to differ with Fran's statements...but she keeps repeating them, even though there is sufficient evidence that her conclusions are incorrect. Anyone who has basic accounting knowledge and reviews the documents will see that Fran is just plain old wrong, but let her carry on...she may be fooling some, but she's not fooling me!

[Johann]

Stan (I am responding to you comments on another thread) - nearly a year ago I responded to the repititious statements of Fran about the accounting at 3ABN. I beg to differ with Fran's statements...but she keeps repeating them, even though there is sufficient evidence that her conclusions are incorrect. Anyone who has basic accounting knowledge and reviews the documents will see that Fran is just plain old wrong, but let her carry on...she may be fooling some, but she's not fooling me!

It has taken all this time, and you bring this up again, without yourself bothering responding to the objections - at least I have not found you responding.

[Ian]

Stan (I am responding to you comments on another thread) - nearly a year ago I responded to the repititious statements of Fran about the accounting at 3ABN. I beg to differ with Fran's statements...but she keeps repeating them, even though there is sufficient evidence that her conclusions are incorrect. Anyone who has basic accounting knowledge and reviews the documents will see that Fran is just plain old wrong, but let her carry on...she may be fooling some, but she's not fooling me!

Thank you Shiny Penny.

In light of your rebuttal, it appears that the following posted on AT today is more than a bit hyperbolic. (among other things.)

from: Daryl Fawcett at 07:18:11 AM
If the lawsuit against Joy & Pickle and the latest subpoenas to Bluehost regarding Advent Talk and Calvin regarding BSDA are to really bury the financial issue regarding Danny Shelton and 3ABN, then I hope that all the documentation of all this financially revealing data is safely stored in various ways, both electronically and on paper for future use.

Artiste w at 10:12:52 AM

Not only that, I believe that Fran's safety itself should be considered.

This post has been edited by Ian: Mar 16 2008, 12:41 PM

[Fran]

Stan (I am responding to you comments on another thread) - nearly a year ago I responded to the repetitious statements of Fran about the accounting at 3ABN. I beg to differ with Fran's statements...but she keeps repeating them, even though there is sufficient evidence that her conclusions are incorrect. Anyone who has basic accounting knowledge and reviews the documents will see that Fran is just plain old wrong, but let her carry on...she may be fooling some, but she's not fooling me!

Hey.

And after so long a time. I sure hope you are right! Show me the proof that things have changed and I will cease to post. However, my documentation covers the time when things were not done correctly at 3ABN. Why would this problem at 3ABN last from 2000-2006 when auditors wrote then up for all those years?

Then in Jan 2006, Walt asked AToday not to publish the information about the Trust Funds, and he told them there was a problem, but they were fixing it. He asked for extra time to fix it; however, it did not get fixed. Look at all the audit reports for 2006. You are wrong. But show proof it is fixed and clear up all the 6 years of errors, then I will shut up.

By the way I also fear for my safety too! I see this as the great controversy between Christ and Satan. I believe the truth is there and people believe the truth. I am for the truth. I am on the side of my creator.

I won't comment on what or who I think you are. However, I will continue on!