Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Klemm & Associates, LLC's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Klemm & Associates, LLC has 2 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Klemm & Associates, LLC

  14780 Clayton Rd Ballwin, MO 63011-2634

• 

  Klemm & Associates, LLC

  14792 Clayton Rd Ballwin, MO 63011-2634

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/30/2025

  Type:Billing Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I used this business to file my 2023 taxes. In January, I received a letter from the ** *** advising that there was an issue with my 2023 taxes and that action was needed. I emailed Klemm and Associates and there was significant delay to them responding at all and to addressing the issue. This resulted in me needing to pay another business to handle this issue for me AND has resulted in ** *** from releasing my money to me for my 2024 State Tax refund (which I still do not have).To recap:1/12/25: I initially emailed their office regarding the *** letter about my 2023 taxes.1/15/25: After receiving no response, I emailed again to follow up. Their office responded on the same date (1/15) that they were looking into it.2/6/25: I sent an email to follow up asking if they had figured anything out with the *** letter because I had not heard anything back from their office.2/11/25: I sent another follow up email to their office because I did not receive any response to my previous email and still had not heard anything regarding the *** letter.3/18/25: I sent yet another email to follow up with their office because I had not received responses to my previous emails and still had not heard anything regarding the *** letter.3/23/25: I sent another email to follow up with their office because I had not received any response to my previous emails and still had not heard anything back regarding the *** letter.3/24/25: I received a response that their office sent a notice to *** and they provided a copy of that to me (their notice was inaccurately dated for September 2024). Their email cited "tax season" as the reason for the over 2 month delay in addressing this time-sensitive letter that I initially sent on January 12th.

  Business Response

  Date: 05/19/2025

  L.L.C.
  Klemm & Associates,
  
  TAX, ACCOUNTING, AND CONSULTING
  
  *************************************************************************************
  
  ************** OFFICE | ************** FAX | *******************************
  
  May 17, 2025
  
  To whom it may concern:
  
  RE: **** ****** Complaint
  
  We are writing this in response to a complaint the BBB received on behalf of a former
  client of our tax and accounting firm.
  
  ******* ****** received a Balance Due Notice from the ******************* of
  Revenue on January 2, 2025. In his complaint he states there was significant delay in
  responding. *** ****** sent us the notice on January 12, 2025. *** ****** waited 10 days after
  receiving this notice to send the notice for us to review. From November 2024-Mid/end of
  January 2025 our office was undergoing construction, there were periods of time when internet,
  and power were down due to construction where we did not have the ability to access files or
  information relevant to the notice. Unfortunately, the delay in his sending of the notice caused a
  delay in any response as we were in the middle of our 1/31 deadline 1099, Payroll Quarterlies,
  and W2 filing deadline that we do several hundred of, as well as this is the time in which we
  mail, or email roughly ***** individual tax organizers to our clients in preparation of the
  upcoming tax season. During tax season we have deadlines that unfortunately take up most if
  not all of our time because of the condensed nature of tax season. Following the 1/31 deadline,
  the next is the 3/15 deadline for Partnerships and ****** filings, and then the 4/15 deadline for
  individual and C-Corp tax return filings. As a point of reference this notice appears to not be the
  original notice as the format of the notice indicates there have been other mailings to *** ******
  prior to him receiving this specific notice. Original Missouri Notices that are associated with
  adjustments or balances due do not start with the Balance Due Notice. They begin with the
  Adjustment notice, which is generally 3 pages, the first indicating that the *******************
  of Revenue made an adjustment to the taxpayers return, and a due date or period in which to
  respond to if you disagreed with their adjustments, a second page showing the taxpayers filed
  information and the adjustments ** DOR is making to the return, and a third page generally
  outlining specifically what boxes they are adjusting, and why. The Balance Due notice is
  typically, at minimum, the second or third notice the taxpayer receives. This particular balance
  due notice also has not due date, to respond, and no period indicated to respond timely in, which
  means that the taxpayer did not provide us the original notice when received, likely 3-6 months
  prior to receiving this notice. The taxpayer never sent us the original notice that lines out the
  adjustments and why they made changes. Because we were working with the balance due notice
  it takes more time as we do not know exactly what or why any changes were made. This causes
  additional time required to research and look into what they changed, how they changed it, and
  look into what the remedy for this is. If we had the original notice, or notices that were sent prior
  to this notice, months prior, before we were in the middle of our office construction and buildout,
  it would have been handled much faster and less time into researching the notice and tax return
  to determine what the cause of the notice was. *** ******* 2023 return was filed and accepted
  on 3/18/24 by the federal and state. Both were accepted. This tells me that the original
  adjustment notice would likely have come within 2-4 months of this date. *** ****** indicates
  in his complaint about a delayed time of our office to respond to him pertaining to the notice, but
  the real delay started when we did not receive the original notice many months prior.
  
  *** ****** also chose not to use our services for his 2024 tax return and was also no
  longer a client at this time. We responded to the notice on 3/13/25 via email to the ** DOR.
  Unfortunately, the following day the major storms came through this are with a tornado that was
  within a tenth to a quarter mile of our office, and that knocked out our power for several days,
  and knocked out our internet for roughly a week. This delayed us in sending *** ****** the
  response to his notice we had sent. Unfortunately, our administrative assistant who was in
  contact with *** ****** caught the norovirus that was going around and was also highly
  contagious and, incapacitated for roughly a week and unable to send any information to *************** during this time. *** ****** also references and incorrect date on our letter that was
  emailed to the ** DOR, while this date was incorrect on letter (the date is in reference to when
  we wrote the letter) this has no relevance on the filing of the response as the ** DOR does not
  look at that date, rather the date in which they received the response via email, which was on
  3/13/25. That is the date that matters.
  
  We received an email on 3/18/25 indicating he had received a new notice, which was not
  provided to us, indicating he needed to respond within 60 days to respond. He then followed up
  5 days later saying he his 30 days were coming to an end, even though 5 days prior he said his
  new notice that he received had 60 days to respond. If either of those time frames are in fact
  accurate, because we did not receive a copy of the new notice, we responded well within the
  window for his response. Due to our internet outage, and the illness in our staff at the time even
  though we had already responded within the time frame, *** ****** went to another accounting
  firm to respond to the notice, their response was in fact after our response as well.
  
  As a separate clarifying note, we did not charge *** ****** for the response we did send
  either. Our engagement letter from his prior tax return, that he signed, stating that any
  engagement outside of that tax return was not covered under that engagement letter, and he can
  be charged for our time in responding. I am including the exact excerpt from our engagement
  letter at that time in reference to this below.
  
  Klemm is responsible for preparing only the returns listed above. Klemm's preparation fee does
  not include services such as responses to inquiries by taxing agencies, support for examination
  by taxing authorities, amending tax returns, or compiling tax estimates. However, we are
  available to represent or assist you if needed for an additional fee. Our fees for such services are
  at our standard rates, currently $125-200/hr and would be covered under a separate engagement.
  We have not charged him for this billable work to this point, but by signing that
  engagement letter for that tax return, he acknowledges that we in fact could have, and when
  looking at my records from our timekeeping software, based on the time spent researching, and
  responding we have 1.63 hours into the response. This means we could have billed between
  roughly $200-325 for our time spent in response. Again, we did not bill him for this, but we
  could.
  
  Now, if he would like us to reimburse him for his cost for the other firm to respond to the
  notice, even though it was after we responded, then I will create and send the invoice for our
  time in responding. Based off of all the information provided we did in fact respond within the
  time frame parameters of the notices he did receive, as the original notice he sent us did not have
  a due date, but the subsequent notice he received and did not send us said he had 60 days to
  respond. Secondly, he was no longer a client of ours at this time as he had decided to go
  elsewhere for his return to be prepared. The notice was not caused by any error or mistake in the
  tax return that we prepared and filed for *** ******* as the ** DOR had an issue matching his
  ** withholding from his W2 to his return and in error did not apply his withholding to his
  account as payments made.
  
  *** ****** and his significant other were both clients of ours for the filing of their
  separate 2023 tax returns. *** ****** left a negative review on ******* and also had his
  significant other leave one as well, even through this situation had nothing to do with her account
  or anything to do with her taxes. The indication is that *** ****** would have requested to her
  to leave a response as well, even though this was his notice that he received and did not involve
  her in any capacity. They both also stated in their reviews that we filed his taxes incorrectly.
  This is a complete fabrication of the truth. In the response to *** ****** with the notice
  response we explained that the ** DOR, it appeared, did not account for his ** Withholding
  from a W2, and the state was in error and he would not owe the amounts once the state matched
  his withholding to his *********************************************** file his return with errors
  in it. We filed it with the information provided, but that also did not stop *** ******* himself,
  and *** ****** engaging others to respond negatively on ****** and spread false information
  about the situation. Again, this is completely inappropriate and unprofessional for him to engage
  an external third party who did not have anything to do with this matter, to leave a negative
  review claiming the same issues after he did when they were not part of the situation at all.
  
  *** ****** also said in an email that he had already filed his return and that the state had
  withheld his refund due to the outstanding balance from the notice he had sent us originally. We
  have no proof that this happened, and when we sent the information to *** ****** about our
  response to the state, we told him it could take 12 weeks to 6 months for the state to respond to
  our response. This is the average turn around we are currently seeing from the state. We also
  could not call the state on his behalf to quicken any process as we do not have a power of
  attorney for him allowing us to talk to the state. If we had in fact received the actual original
  adjustment notice he received, and not the balance due notice he sent in January, we could have
  responded timely, and well before the 2024 tax return filing, and it would have caused no delay,
  or issue with his 2024 ** Refund, but again, we were not engaged my *** ****** to prepare his
  2024 tax return, so I cannot speak on if he was supposed to get a refund, or if in fact it did cause
  any delays, as we have been provided no information to substantiate that. If I were to draw any
  comparisons or conclusions from his statements in his emails, and both his, and his significant
  others negative ****** reviews, there are fabrications in the reviews that do not leave it out of the
  realm of possibility he was simply saying this to bolster his desire for us to pay for him paying
  someone else to also respond to the notice.
  
  We hope this clarification is acceptable. If additional questions, or need any additional
  documentation, we can absolutely provide detail for anything we have referenced in this
  response, please do not hesitate to contact us.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ******** *. Klemm, MBA
  Managing Member

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/20/2025

  I am not satisfied with the business' response, but it seems as though if I do not accept it, they are threatening to bill me. I reached out numerous times to this business in regard to this issue with zero response from them at all and there are many other customers (based on public reviews) who experience the same from this business. I sent them the notice as soon as I received it, so if there was a notice sent prior to January, then it did not make its way to me. The business had every opportunity to respond directly to me and opted not to, instead waiting until this response was filed with BBB and then threatening to bill me over $200 for their insufficient services. I am not sure how to proceed with the complaint at this point, as I do not want them to follow through with their threat and bill me for their "services."

  Business Response

  Date: 05/20/2025

  o whom it may concern:
  
  RE: **** ****** Complaint
  
  We have new information pertaining to the notice response we sent to ** DOR on **************** behalf in early/mid-March. It appears that the firm Mr. ****** engaged with to respond
  on his behalf, either did not respond, or the ** DOR has yet to process their response as **
  DOR called our office today to discuss the response we sent, and provided
  
  
  Klemm & Associates, L.L.C.
  TAX, ACCOUNTING, AND CONSULTING
  *************************************************************************************
  ************** OFFICE | ************** FAX | *******************************
  
  May 20, 2025
  
  
  us more information
  as to the issues arising from the notice that was sent.
  
  We received a call late this afternoon (5/19/25) from Agent **** from the ** DOR
  explaining that the error did not pertain to anything to do with the return, and that the
  information on the notice was different from what the actual issue was. The ** DOR explained
  that everything we provided matched to their records, and the issue actually arose from a refund
  that was sent by ** DOR to Mr. ****** in *********************************** error, and should
  have been sent to his wife at the time instead of him. They acknowledged they sent the payment
  to the incorrect person, but he cashed the check. We were never made aware of this check or
  anything pertaining to any payment from ** DOR during that time frame. We were never
  contacted to advise if he should cash the payment even though it was different from what his tax
  return showed his refund should be. We were not engaged, nor did we have anything to do with
  the 2022 joint tax return that was filed. The ** DOR went on to explain that there is still an
  error with a balance that has nothing to do with our response. Mr. ****** engaged with us to
  complete only the 2023 tax return which we did, and which the state acknowledged we made no
  errors in the filing. Because Mr. ****** cashed the check from the prior year return in error, this
  has created a balance due, and the correcting of this Notice he received will be substantially
  greater in time and effort to correct at this moment.
  
  The agent also let us know that Mr. ****** would have received no less than 2
  adjustment notices after receiving the check before the Balance Due Notice that he sent us in
  January that were never provided to us, nor were we aware of in any way. Mr. ****** mentions
  in his complaint about the delay in filing and lack of timeliness, but it appears that would only
  apply to us, as he neglected to provide any prior information and notices he did receive
  according to the ** DOR throughout the entire year of 2024. All of these notices ** DOR
  says were sent would have included the adjustments, and the balance due at that time, along with
  due dates to respond, normally within 60 days of those notices he received in 2024, and those
  were never provided, and the issue does not appear to have been of concern to him at that time.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  ******** *. Klemm, MBA
  Managing Member