Some customers at embassy
are not ready for business

Dear A.M. Costa Rica:
 
On Nov. 16, I went to Banco National to deposit 7,000 colons in my friend's bank account. The teller told me I could not do that and that I needed a letter of retirement. So I asked a manager if this was correct, and he told me the same thing, I needed a letter of retirement and offered that I could obtain one at the American Embassy.
 
I went to the American Embassy the next day, Nov 17. A guard at the entrance told me I could go right inside and inquire at the information desk. At the desk I was directed to the passport window. While I was seated waiting for my number to be called, an American was seated next to me occupying two seats, wearing flip flops, cut off jeans and a sleeveless t-shirt. In the space of 15 minutes he drank three cans of Red Bull. He proceeded to tell me that while he was asleep one of the hotel staff came in his room, opened his safe and took his money and his passport, all the while waiving his arms wildly above his head and thrashing his legs around. I'm thinking to myself: "no wonder some of these people have a hard time at the embassy."  Where do we find such men?   He would have been kicked out of McDonalds.
 
Back to me, well turns out I was in the wrong line. I quickly went back to the desk, got a ticket to the Social Security window and in 10 minutes my number was called.  The agent provided me with a letter saying I was on Social Security including the necessary stamp and notary imprint in 10 minutes.  The agent was polite, well trained and went out of his way to be helpful.  He was experiencing printer problems, so he went to another department to print the document.  How is that for service?

EDITOR'S NOTE: We have no idea why a man has to prove he is on Social Security to depost the equivalent of  $12.61 into another's bank account. But we do know that the citizen services workers at the Social Security window in the U.S. Embassy always have been helpful. Previous writers have been critical of workers who issue visas to Costa Ricans.

Coverage includes issues
found nowhere else here

Dear A.M. Costa Rica:

Over a year ago I switched to A.M. Costa Rica because I found that not only does it have thorough coverage of day-to-day news, it also covers lots of issues that affect us all. Recent examples are “NOISE” and “LUXURY TAX.”
 
To the “NOISE” issue, I would like to add hawkers with loudspeakers that are heard 100s of meters around starting at 6.30 a.m. on weekends selling eggs, bread, etc in Sabana Oeste/Bello Horizonte area. Also extremely annoying are the low flying small planes that take off from Pavas airport early morning, throughout the week. This was not the case five years ago when I purchased the house. Planes started about three years ago, so they must have changed the routing.

I must say you have made many attempts to clarify the very complex issue of “LUXURY TAX” which has given us good idea of how to tackle it and, if filed electronically, we might just make it. However if three different people: 1.The owner,  2. a real estate agent  3.An inspector were evaluating same property, considering all the complex formulas and different perception, they could all be 10 percent or more off each other. So if there are real estate agents capable of accurate evaluation, they have to be approved by the treasury so the homeowner is not held liable. When I had appraisal of my 3,500-square foot home done in Chicago about five years ago, it cost me $300 for four to five hours of work. It is hard to believe there have been comments made of over $1,000 in your paper.
 
Property values everywhere have come down substantially in last four years, a $250,000.00 home purchased then is difficult to sell for $200,000.00. So Dennis Rogers' comment that a home construction costing $90,000.00 five years ago should be three times that now is out of line and if that is how the Treasury is evaluating construction costs, God help us.
 
All in all I think the Treasury, without giving us enough time and resources, has very unfairly put a gun to our heads and made it a do or die situation. And in cases like mine where I could be on either side with a 35-year-old house, it may be safer just to pay by cutting down expenditure in other areas.
After all it is for a good cause.
 
EDITOR'S NOTE: The appraisal in Chicago was probably done using comparative market values. Tributación here requires a more complex replacement cost new less depreciation approach. Hence the additional expense. See our luxury tax page for more articles.

Some indirect evidence
is allowed in the U.S.

Dear A.M. Costa Rica:

Indirect evidence, sadly, could take the form of anonymous witness statements, unsigned or unattributed to their makers.  The practice of prosecuting through indirect evidence allows the prosecutor to present, as fact, statements which cannot be cross examined as there is no right to confront the maker of the statement.  We Americans think of this as a violation of the Sixth Amendment "to be confronted with the witnesses against him" but unfortunately indirect evidence is also used in this country in some places. 

In prison crimes, for instance, the prosecutor, usually an agent of the warden, may use an unsigned affidavit to prosecute the supposed wrongdoer if the warden "believes the statement to be true" or if the informant "has told the truth in the past."  It is very flimsy form of incriminating evidence, which would have less impact if all the other normal due process safeguards are in place, including well prepared defense counsel, impartial Judge or jury, and the right to meaningful attack on the inability of the prosecutor to bring forward the incriminating witness.