What are you Ch 13 payments (propposed and final outcome)?

[alo]

I have a higher income and may not qualify for Ch 7. I pass the means test (barely) but we'll see about my monthly expenses getting approved. I will have my attorney guide me (once I select one).

But I read somewhere that there is another measurement...something about ALSO NEEDING enough disposable income to repay 25% of your unsecured debt (for me about $400/month). Otherwise what happens??

I don't think I'll have this much DI. Has anyone heard of this? Experienced it?

I know it depends upon total debt, but what is the range of payments being made? Is anyone paying less than $100/month for 60 months? Are people paying over $1K?

[keepsmiling]

Many people here pay well over 1K/month. But that's really irrelevant for you. It may be entirely secured debt.
Just as people's salaries and expenses vary widely, their payments will as well. You really can't make any kind of educated guess what YOUR payment should be by seeing what others pay.
I would be curious to know if there are any under 100....

You want to plan carefully and get a good lawyer who crafts the right plan for YOU. Keep reading.

[kornellred]

First of all - there is never a "choice" between Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 filing. You can only file Chapter 7 if you qualify to do so. If you try and do not qualify, your case will be dismissed. If your attorney says it is possible to file under Chapter 7 but feels that the court might not agree, you must be prepared for dismissal or Chapter 13 as an alternative.
There is no such requirement as needing enough DMI to repay 25% of unsecured claims in a Chapter 13. Some people are able to pay 100 percent; others never pay a single dime to unsecured creditors.. If that were true, some debtors would not qualify for either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13.

[LadyInTheRed]

I know it depends upon total debt, but what is the range of payments being made? Is anyone paying less than $100/month for 60 months? Are people paying over $1K?

Your plan payment is not determined by your total debt unless perhaps you have enough income to pay 100% of your unsecured claims. Otherwise, your payment is determined by how much disposible income you have. You may have certain debts that must be paid during the plan (priority debts, arrears, secured debts), in which case to propose feasible plan you must show that you have sufficient income for those debts to be paid during your plan.

You can't determine whether your plan payment is reasonable based on the payments of others. But, to answer your question, my plan with a $500 payment was confirmed as originally submitted.

[salsa]

Our payment is $1754.00 a month. That includes 2 vehicles, house arrears, and priority debt. Unsecured are getting nothing.

[angel7821]

I started out with a payment of 132.00 and no way the trustee would go with that. I had to find a better paying job and got confirmed with a payment of 370.00.

[keepsmiling]

First of all - there is never a "choice" between Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 filing. You can only file Chapter 7 if you qualify to do so. If you try and do not qualify, your case will be dismissed. If your attorney says it is possible to file under Chapter 7 but feels that the court might not agree, you must be prepared for dismissal or Chapter 13 as an alternative.
There is no such requirement as needing enough DMI to repay 25% of unsecured claims in a Chapter 13. Some people are able to pay 100 percent; others never pay a single dime to unsecured creditors.. If that were true, some debtors would not qualify for either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13.

I could swear I have seen some similar condition to that somewhere, about the 2x %.... maybe that's for under the median filers?

[woeisme]

while there is nothing in BK law that says a certain % has to be paid, some trustees have certain "unofficial" rules of operation, where they object to any plans that propose less than a specific amount to creditors. In those cases, the petitioner always has the option to argue their proposed plan to the judge, despite trustee objection. There is a rule in BK law that in a CH 13 the creditors must get at least as much as they would receive if you did a CH 7 liquidation, which sometimes gets people in a real jam if they are trying to protect non-exempt assets but don't have enough income to pay back in a 13 the value of the asset they are trying to protect.

[alo]

I don't believe I ever indicated that filing one way or another is a choice (and I am certain to advise with an attorney on the pros, cons and possibilities of outcome for my specific situation). However, based on preliminary research and reading others experiences, there seems to be "shades of grey" regarding Ch 7 qualification, Ch 13 payment analysis and the influences of trustee personalities/case load...but I've only just started delving into this subject.

Also, I found this but not sure if it is a hard rule...or merely a guideline.

If the debtor’s disposable monthly income, DMI, multiplied by 60, is less than 25% of the debtors unsecured, non-priority debts, then the debtor passes the means test. If the debtor’s DMI, multiplied by 60, is greater than 25% of the debtors unsecured, non-priority debts, then the debtor fails the means test and can only file chapter 7 only with a showing of special circumstances.

Best to all.

[Carter]

Mine was $450 mo. for 3 yrs. Trustee said no because the unsecured creditors would get less than 1%. Plan was modified to $400 mo. for 5 yrs. now unsecured creditors are getting 24%. We qualified to be on the 3 yr plan but the atty didn't want to fight it!

[ValleYum]

I don't believe I ever indicated that filing one way or another is a choice (and I am certain to advise with an attorney on the pros, cons and possibilities of outcome for my specific situation). However, based on preliminary research and reading others experiences, there seems to be "shades of grey" regarding Ch 7 qualification, Ch 13 payment analysis and the influences of trustee personalities/case load...but I've only just started delving into this subject.

Also, I found this but not sure if it is a hard rule...or merely a guideline.

If the debtor’s disposable monthly income, DMI, multiplied by 60, is less than 25% of the debtors unsecured, non-priority debts, then the debtor passes the means test. If the debtor’s DMI, multiplied by 60, is greater than 25% of the debtors unsecured, non-priority debts, then the debtor fails the means test and can only file chapter 7 only with a showing of special circumstances.

Best to all.

We talked about that 25% issue in this thread about a year or so ago: http://www.bkforum.com/showthread.ph...-5-years-thing ***Be aware the numbers have since changed AGAIN! LOL

Essentially, it is the second and final attempt at passing the Means Test. The most simplistic explanation was/is this:

If you need to use the secondary (25%) presumption determination - you put the total amount of your unsecured debt (credit cards, signature loans, etc.) on Line 53. Multiply this number by .25 to compute the amount to enter on Line 54.

If the amount on Line 51 is smaller than Line 54 - you pass - the presumption of abuse does not arise.

If the amount on Line 51 equals or is larger than Line 54 - you do not pass - the presumption of abuse does arise.

[keepsmiling]

I know I am getting old and slightly senile, but I was pretty sure I had read that^^^^

Also- as to the "choice" of which to file issue--- not exactly true. Sometimes those who qualify for a 7 choose to do a 13. Just ask Mountaindo
And there are borderline cases regularly, which could go either way.
Law is rarely crystal clear- that's why lawyers argue--- and bk is never a one-size-fits-all issue. If it were the forum pages would be much much fewer.

[ValleYum]

I know I am getting old and slightly senile, but I was pretty sure I had read that^^^^

Also- as to the "choice" of which to file issue--- not exactly true. Sometimes those who qualify for a 7 choose to do a 13. Just ask Mountaindo
And there are borderline cases regularly, which could go either way.
Law is rarely crystal clear- that's why lawyers argue--- and bk is never a one-size-fits-all issue. If it were the forum pages would be much much fewer.

You? Senile? Never! I swore up and down I had read it, too, but forgot slap about participating in it~ LOL Happy Friday!

[keepsmiling]

Yep, we senior citizens are losing it. Before MD comes along and corrects me, I will correct myself.
Her income qualified her for a 7, but the time frame did not.
However, some who could do a 7 may choose to do 13 instead- say, for purposes of a lien strip, or to keep an asset, or even just to avoid extra scrutiny.
There is a certain amount of manipulation of expenses- all within a legal framework, of course- that can be used to swing a case either way. Buying a new car is an often used one, as is increasing insurance coverage.

So that thing about "no choice"-- again, not exactly true.

[Reddrocket07]

My plan started out at $500 a month but was increased to $600 to allow additional payment to my lawyer. It will probably go up again because I got a new job, make slightly more and will need to increase the repayment amount to make sure my plan will be paid in full at the end of the 60 months. It's a little scary because we budget very tightly, so the wage increase has me nervous. We are only paying secured 1% so there is no room to drop that.