So, I got a pre-confirmation status report from the trustee Saturday requesting some information. No big deal. Then I read these items.
"Amend the Means Test Line 50a to correct amount of the plan payment."
"Debtor is requesting a Means Test Waiver but has not adjusted expenses to reflect no need for summer daycare."
This is what frustrates me and why I have to vent. My wife is a teacher. In our district, teachers can elect to take full pay during school and nothing over the summer, or have a defferment to have income over the summer. The latter is what my wife elected. Here's the kicker, no benefits are taken out over the summer because they've all been paid during the school term. The result is that over the summer my wife's checks are about $600 higher. She also usually works summer school as well.
Our 6 month look-back includes that extra summer amount as well as her working summer school. So, if our plan is based on my wife's salary at a higher than normal rate and averaged over 12 months and additional hours for summer school, how on earth would we afford a higher payment with her not working summer school? In addition, she intends to work summer school indefinitely to help out the budget. This was all brought up in the 341. So isn't working summer school justification for daycare expenses during the summer?
I know it's just some numbers formula. But, shouldn't these situations, as discussed at the 341 be noted in the trustees office? I just hate being treated as a number in the system after already giving all of this personal information and circumstances to the trustee. I mean you can't tell me that no teacher has ever filed for bk and no one is familiar with situations like this.
Needless to say, I have a call in to our lawyer, but I'm just frustrated.
"Amend the Means Test Line 50a to correct amount of the plan payment."
"Debtor is requesting a Means Test Waiver but has not adjusted expenses to reflect no need for summer daycare."
This is what frustrates me and why I have to vent. My wife is a teacher. In our district, teachers can elect to take full pay during school and nothing over the summer, or have a defferment to have income over the summer. The latter is what my wife elected. Here's the kicker, no benefits are taken out over the summer because they've all been paid during the school term. The result is that over the summer my wife's checks are about $600 higher. She also usually works summer school as well.
Our 6 month look-back includes that extra summer amount as well as her working summer school. So, if our plan is based on my wife's salary at a higher than normal rate and averaged over 12 months and additional hours for summer school, how on earth would we afford a higher payment with her not working summer school? In addition, she intends to work summer school indefinitely to help out the budget. This was all brought up in the 341. So isn't working summer school justification for daycare expenses during the summer?
I know it's just some numbers formula. But, shouldn't these situations, as discussed at the 341 be noted in the trustees office? I just hate being treated as a number in the system after already giving all of this personal information and circumstances to the trustee. I mean you can't tell me that no teacher has ever filed for bk and no one is familiar with situations like this.
Needless to say, I have a call in to our lawyer, but I'm just frustrated.
Comment