Question on Ch. 7 Statement of Financial Affairs

[Debster222]

For those who filed pro-se, or if you just happen to know......

I am filling out the Statement of Financial Affairs and I'm at the part where I fill in payments to creditors, (item 3) and it's asking for the total amounts paid to any creditor in the 90 days immediately preceding this case. I guess they're trying to establish if I was playing favorites with paying people, and in a sense, yes. I have continued to pay the two secured creditors for obvious reasons. Will that get me into trouble?

[ThreadsSnapping]

We made payments of $1650 for our 2 cars and our lawyer didn't seem to have any issues with it. We are keeping both cars. I don't think it's really much of an issue if you are planning on keeping the secured assets. I think they are more interested in if you paid a large sum to one cc and not another. You should be fine.

TS

[Debster222]

We made payments of $1650 for our 2 cars and our lawyer didn't seem to have any issues with it. We are keeping both cars. I don't think it's really much of an issue if you are planning on keeping the secured assets. I think they are more interested in if you paid a large sum to one cc and not another. You should be fine.

TS

That's what I figured, but wanted to make sure. I know I am probably like everyone else who's filed for BK.....NERVOUS AS HELL. ::

Does everyone make a nervous wreck out of themselves over this? LOL I have read a lot of posts here where people were all tied up in knots over nothing. I'll be glad when this is over!

[BKParalegal]

If you re-read the question, it is only referencing payments to unsecured creditors and more precisely any amounts over $600. This is in regards of preferential treatment to one unsecured creditor over the others.

[ThreadsSnapping]

If you re-read the question, it is only referencing payments to unsecured creditors and more precisely any amounts over $600. This is in regards of preferential treatment to one unsecured creditor over the others.

It does? That's not what my bk paperwork says. I see all payments and any creditor. Where does it say unsecured? I see the over $600 part.

This is directly from my bk paperwork:
a. Individual or joint debtor(s) with primarily consumer debts. List all payments on loans, installment purchases of goods or services, and other debts to any creditor made within 90 days immediately preceding the commencement of this case unless the aggregate value of all property that constitutes or is affected by such transfer is less than $600.

I must be missing something.

TS

[BKParalegal]

You are right, technically the ? does not reference specifically unsecured debt, but that is the intent of the ? for the trustee to review. In reality, what the trustee is looking for is if you paid an unsecured creditor a chunk of change ( like cashing out your IRA to pay a bill). The trustee can strong-arm the creditor and have the funds sent to him/her and he/she gets to keep 25% and the rest is redistributed to your creditors equally.

So you can list all your payments to your home loan, car loan, and other secured debt, but the trustee doesn't care about those, he/she can't touch that.

Good Luck

[Debster222]

It does? That's not what my bk paperwork says. I see all payments and any creditor. Where does it say unsecured? I see the over $600 part.

This is directly from my bk paperwork:
a. Individual or joint debtor(s) with primarily consumer debts. List all payments on loans, installment purchases of goods or services, and other debts to any creditor made within 90 days immediately preceding the commencement of this case unless the aggregate value of all property that constitutes or is affected by such transfer is less than $600.

I must be missing something.

TS

That's what mine says, too. That's what confused me.

[ThreadsSnapping]

The questions ask one thing but what they really want is a completly different thing. Gotta love it when government tries to make something simple. Of course, they may have wanted all payments over $600 originally but it evolved into just really wanting the unsecureds. Looking back on it, neither my rent or my cell phone are on there and they are $400 and $225 each a month. But as they are both month-to-month contracts and had been already paid for the month it may not have been an issue.

Good luck with the paperwork.

TS

[PoorGrammyinBK7]

What if you paid OFF the balances of 3 (personal used for business) credit cards ($15K, $6.3K and $4.5K) and on a small personal one that had a balance of around $400-500 you paid $100 - all in just under 90 days of filing?

* There was a lawsuit at the time, but it was in dispute and in negotiations for settlement. There was no judgment at the time - but now there is.

Are the payments still preferential, since it was not one, but all credit cards that were paid more than minimum?