Messed up ch 13 case

[kaygee]

Ok, do you know what the court means when they say "income test requires 100% as indicated on spreadsheets"?

[justbroke]

Ok, do you know what the court means when they say "income test requires 100% as indicated on spreadsheets"?

What do you mean by "the court"? Do you mean the Trustee's documents submitted to the court?

In any event, based on what you wrote, it sounds like you are required to be in a 100% plan. This could be either due to your spouse's income or that you are trying to keep property that is non-exempt. You really need to have a face-to-face with your attorney. I'm relatively certain that the attorney would explain the same things!

[mountanddo]

This is what I don't understand. If the BK court has determined that you are to be in 100% plan there must of been some evidence that your income would support that. Now you say that you have no income. If you are going to use this as a reason why you can't pay your plan payments I'm pretty sure your case would be in serious trouble as you must show that you have income to support a chapter 13.

[kaygee]

If they do dismiss the case, will I get any of the money back I've already paid in? And then, where do I go from there?

[katztoo]

I notice you live in SC, I do also and my trustee is impossible and unreasonable! Always stirring up trouble. I wonder if we hve the same one? Did you go through the Spartanburg court?

[kaygee]

Yes, it is Ms. H.. I have had a funny feeling about her from the start.

[kaygee]

Yes, when I filed, I had enough income to do 300-500/mo. But now business has steadily declined(it may pick up if it looks like we are going to have a change of leadership(or non-leadership) in the white house) since end of 2010, despite what the news reports or pundits on tv say. So to come to me and now say it needs to be $1150 is ludicrous. I would have been much better off just paying creditors what I could and trying to make deals with them. This 1150 has me paying more than what my pymnts were in early 2010 when I sat down with lawyer. Go figure. It's like... Hi, we're from the gov't and we're here to help you...Ha Ha.

[justbroke]

The Chapter 13 (and 13) Trustee is not from the government. Just an attorney appointed to administer Chapter 13 cases. Indeed some are a lot tougher than others. If they are tough, then you need a tough attorney who can navigate both the bankruptcy code and the precedences in your Division/District/Circuit in order to come up with a plan that works.

Unfortunately, it looks like the Trustee believes that our non-filing spouses income is fair game. Only you and your attorney can determine what you will fight for and what you believe is accurate. The Trustee's job is to get the most for the creditors that they can. They are an adversary -- always.

As for getting your money back? You would only get money back that the Trustee had not already paid out to creditors at the time of the dismissal.

[kaygee]

After speaking with my lawyer he explaine that the trustee wants a 100% payback of debts. He knows that is not possible for me to us to do so he suggeste just let it be dismissed and don't worry about cc companies. In his opinion few if ever come after debtor. He also said that after 2 yrs(June will be 2 yrs) the statute runs out and they can't come after me. What do you think? And do I get any of the money back I've paid in subtracting the lawyer fee?

[mountanddo]

After speaking with my lawyer he explaine that the trustee wants a 100% payback of debts. He knows that is not possible for me to us to do so he suggeste just let it be dismissed and don't worry about cc companies. In his opinion few if ever come after debtor. He also said that after 2 yrs(June will be 2 yrs) the statute runs out and they can't come after me. What do you think? And do I get any of the money back I've paid in subtracting the lawyer fee?

First, does your income support you paying back 100% of debts? If it does you have more of a budget problem that a debt problem. Your attorney should be able to explain exactly why you are in a 100% plan.

The statement that few, if any cc companies go after debtors is a ridiculous statement to make especially for an attorney. Think about it...if that were true then no one would ever need to file bankruptcy.

You need a new attorney...immediately.

[justbroke]

He also said that after 2 yrs(June will be 2 yrs) the statute runs out and they can't come after me. What do you think? And do I get any of the money back I've paid in subtracting the lawyer fee?

This is a careless statement -- if it is a direct quote from the attorney. The statute of limitations (SOL) is a nice thing to try to get behind, but until you get there, the creditor or the creditor's successor (a junk debt buyer / collection agency) will file a lawsuit and get a judgment. Once they have a judgment, the judgment is good for 10 years; additionally, the judgment could be extended another 10 years for a total of 20 years. The SOL date also resets as soon as you make a payment or otherwise just "say" to them that you owe the debt anytime during that 3 years (in S.C. for open credit accounts).

The judgment can attach to all your real and personal property. This is why I would be careful about all you need to do is get past 2 years. It may actually be 3 years for debt collection on open accounts in S.C... not 2.

You are not going to get any money back, just as I explained earlier. In fact, you may still owe attorney fees after dismissal.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but this is sounding like the one of the worse planned Chapter 13 bankruptcies I've read about in a long time. Usually, this is the hallmark of a pro se Chapter 13 case. However, I'm shocked that it's an attorney-represented debtor. Just my opinion.