Lawyer didn't amend Schedules after job change

[cz3ch]

I'm in a C13 and on target to discharge in Nov of this year. I had an increase in pay in 1/16 (40K+ increase) which he amended my schedules I+J which gave me a huge DMI. I was already 100% into plan so the trustee never modded or blinked. Then in May my employer went belly up and I started consulting as self employed. I happened to get married a few months later so we amended again to include my consulting income and my wife's income. All was well.

Then in September I landed a job making about 1k more a month. Sent my paystubs to the attorney, and there was no amendment only a wage order to my new employer with my paystubs attached on the docket. I'm curious as to why he wouldn't amend if I was making an extra 1k/month. I asked him about this and he said as long as we supply the pay stubs we don't need to amend unless you have a large increase in salary and also since my plan is already at 100%.

I'm taking a second job (contract) this month which will increase my gross income by 100k, and he said we will definitely amend I+J then but my plan payment won't increase because I'm maxed out/100%.

What I'm curious about is why he didn't amend when I had a job change when I had 1k extra/month. This happened before in 2014 where he didn't amend, just supplied paystubs and updated wage order and I never heard any barking from the trustee.

I was under the impression that anytime there's a pay increase I have to amend so the trustee is in the know. It should be noted that nowhere in my confirmation of plan does it say anything about having to amend or turning in my tax returns. I've been flying right and letting my attorney handle this, but I found it odd that he wouldn't amend with the job change from september. I know I'm supposed to trust in my attorney, but I know that some trustees can be sticklers when it comes to pay increases. Apparently mine is pretty lax?

I'm assuming the attorney knows what he's doing, but being an over-cautious debtor and wanting to fly by the law this raises questions that I don't know if I should even stress about at this point.

For now I'm not losing sleep over it because the trustee never objected or sent correspondence to me or my lawyer. But was wondering what others thought of how the lawyer is handling the case. Maybe amending every time something changes is a red flag or just too much "busy work" for the courts. I don't know. Just found it odd.

Anyways, I'm interested in any insight you fine folks may have.

[justbroke]

Your attorney seems to be sticking by the "unofficial" 10% rule. That is, if the pay increase is less than 10% then you don't really do anything. If the income increases by over 10% and you're in a 100% plan, the only thing you do is update Schedule I/J and be done. There's no need to amend a confirmed plan because nothing would change (your income is not noted on the Plan... only your payments).

They know what they are doing because they know the local rules and customs for your District. When you're in a 100% plan there is not much you need to notify the court. Amending Schedule I/J just keeps everything nice and neat and "on the record." If you're in a 100% plan and make 1000X more money, it will not change your plan payments nor the fact that you're paying 100%.

Trustees are not sticklers about pay raises when you're in a 100% plan. You simply can't "pay more" because you're already paying the maximum. (I will say that there have been arguments made by many Chapter 13 Trustees that if you're in a 100% plan but have enough DMI to pay the plan off sooner, then you should be paying more. This has been defeated so many times that it has been to the Appellate level of most circuits that it's not a factor any longer. In a 100% plan you pay "total value of unsecured claims" / "total commitment period". If the debtor chooses to payoff the 100% plan early, that is their choice. I would never voluntarily increase my plan payment over what's required when I'm in a 100% plan. Because... life happens.)

[cz3ch]

Your attorney seems to be sticking by the "unofficial" 10% rule. That is, if the pay increase is less than 10% then you don't really do anything. If the income increases by over 10% and you're in a 100% plan, the only thing you do is update Schedule I/J and be done. There's no need to amend a confirmed plan because nothing would change (your income is not noted on the Plan... only your payments).

They know what they are doing because they know the local rules and customs for your District. When you're in a 100% plan there is not much you need to notify the court. Amending Schedule I/J just keeps everything nice and neat and "on the record." If you're in a 100% plan and make 1000X more money, it will not change your plan payments nor the fact that you're paying 100%.

Trustees are not sticklers about pay raises when you're in a 100% plan. You simply can't "pay more" because you're already paying the maximum. (I will say that there have been arguments made by many Chapter 13 Trustees that if you're in a 100% plan but have enough DMI to pay the plan off sooner, then you should be paying more. This has been defeated so many times that it has been to the Appellate level of most circuits that it's not a factor any longer. In a 100% plan you pay "total value of unsecured claims" / "total commitment period". If the debtor chooses to payoff the 100% plan early, that is their choice. I would never voluntarily increase my plan payment over what's required when I'm in a 100% plan. Because... life happens.)

That's what I figured he was doing, was just curious about how all of that works. But as you mentioned in a previous post, I'm in a 100% plan so I have way more wiggle room compared to someone who's in a 70% plan.

I'm standing down and am not going to fret about it. That's what I pay the lawyer for. But thanks again for your informative and great answer. Appreciate your help, JB!