high paying job after filing chapter 7

[guest]

Hi all.

I had filed chapter 7 abt 2 wks back...no asset case...i had a good paying job and was laid off abt a year ago...i had started just looking for jobs and now with the help and recommendation of my previous boss the old company wants to hire me back. Its a new position with a higher salary than i was making previously. If confirmed and offered the job the payscale is in the range of 160k + bonus ( total around 200k ) . They have also asked if am willing to sart ASAP( they know i am currently w/o a job ). My 341 is on Nov 30.

I am from Michigan and have filed in the Eastern Districsk. Any suggestions from experienced members as to how soon can i start a new job after filing chapter 7. Is it after filing...after 341...or after getting the discharge. I am not too sure if it varies from district to district.

I will certainly get my attorneys advice...but if anyone can post their opinion advice...i would be grateful

Tthankyou

[johny]

safe to accept offer and start after 341

[merlotwaytogo]

I just had my 341 on 11/5/09. the trustee did not ask my if my salary had changed. I asked my attorney about that same issue. She told me they only look at the time before you file, not the time in between your filing and 341. I would say start the job, you probably won't get your first check for two weeks anyway. good luck and congrats.

[Bell30656]

I got a big promotion with a raise and bonus after filing but before my 341. My attorney knew I was worried about the situation so he brought it up to the trustee right in front of me at the 341. The trustee congratulated me and told me that it would help me rebuild my life. He gave me a piece of his thinking... He said that Chapter 7 is a photograph of my financial life on the day of filing. He said it is a photo, not a movie.

[justbroke]

Be very very careful. There's a plethora of cases just like this one that have been dismissed under 11 USC 707(b)(3) -- "totality of circumstances". It is not safe to assume that because you got a job after filing, that you are safe and will receive your discharge. As you can see, in some cases, the Trustee doesn't care.

However, there was a specific case in which a person received a job before the 341 meeting with IBM at a significant salary, like yours. The Trustee moved for an 11 USC 707(b)(3) motion to dismiss for totality of circumstances. The key was that they received the job just after filing and before the 341 Meeting. They were actually working... which is an important distinction. (A job offer is not a job. You have to be already working for it to be a "job".)

Salary change or promotion is one thing. Having no job, then suddenly having a 6-figure job just after filing is a totally different thing. Work with your attorney. I'm not trying to scare you, but the question as to whether you financial picture changed, is going to be a tough one. Most people are asked that question, some are never asked the question.

[guest]

thx johny merlot and bell. oops thx to you too justbroke..with 6000 plus posts i am inclined to take ur comments very seriously

feel a lot better now...will probably meet my attorney next wk ...and will update.

[dakota112]

I would keep your income to just under the median for your state and tell the trustee you don't believe it will increase in the "near future given my recent past circumstances", and then after the discharge is hopefully obtained, gradually start increasing your income to a level you and your family can survive at. This is my plan. Unfortunately this system is rigged against the average person and is designed to inflict harm and punishment. CH 13 bankruptcy does not give a person a fresh start if they have no assets and being forced into one is essentially an out of prison 5 year home sentence. You must plan this out carefully and strategically so you win and not the TT. Tell the truth as it is. Things change in life and the future has not yet happened.

[justbroke]

CH 13 bankruptcy does not give a person a fresh start if they have no assets and being forced into one is essentially an out of prison 5 year home sentence.

Actually, it's not. A Chapter 13 only hurts those who cannot budget. Most people who emerge from Chapter 13 emerge with a whole new outlook on budgeting, use of cash, and how not to bury themselves in debt. Many Chapter 7 folks find themselves in the same trouble just a year or two out of bankruptcy. If your attorney creates the correct plan, you can have extra cash each month, build a rainy day fund, and even enjoy many things.

The problem with the majority of Chapter 13 debtors is that they just can't save money. That's not the Chapter 13's fault at all. I place it firmly where it belongs, on the debtor. I am in Chapter 13, just had a $1K issue with my septic line, and didn't need to call the Trustee, ask for a suspension of payments, or anything like that. I took the funds from what I "saved" in the last 6 months of my Chapter 13. I have more in my rainy day fund.

A Chapter 13 also allows one to discharge more items than you can in a Chapter 7. This is known as the Chapter 13 superdischarge. A Chapter 13 can also cure arrearages on secured property and the creditor can't object (unless there is cause). Try that in a Chapter 7.

[dakota112]

I understand what you are saying Justbroke, however if you do not want to tear your young child out of private school, be forced to move out of an apt that is over the allowed limit and is in a relatively safe neighborhood and want to have a chance to work hard and put some real money away into savings over the next 5 years, than CH7 is the way to go if you have no assets and can survive long enough with help from others to get off the radar screen of the government, who I feel in this process actually is causing great harm to regular folks who are not connected politically and can't get themselves out of this jam any other way. I advise folks to obtain knowledge on this matter, think it out beforehand, let your atty guide you but do what is best for yourself. If CH13 and its restrictions over 5 years works for you than go for it. For me, it seems drastic in this day and age to put otherwise law abiding citizens under such harsh measures.

[justbroke]

If you do not want to tear your young child out of private school

The Bankruptcy Code has allowances for private school, but to a certain limit. Going to private school is a luxury.

Be forced to move out of an apt that is over the allowed limit and is in a relatively safe neighborhood and want to have a chance to work hard and put some real money away into savings over the next 5 years

So you choose a more expensive apartment, rather than saving? There are certainly chapter places in relatively safe neighborhoods. Most of the time, a person chooses to live in a particular place because of the amenities (I'm guilty of that too).

than CH7 is the way to go if you have no assets and can survive long enough with help from others to get off the radar screen of the government, who I feel in this process actually is causing great harm to regular folks who are not connected politically and can't get themselves out of this jam any other way.

Chapter 7 is a good choice when you can do so. If you an fund a Chapter 13, I see no reason why your creditors should suffer because of your life choices. I know, I'm both pro-debtor but at the same time, sympathetic to creditors.

I advise folks to obtain knowledge on this matter, think it out beforehand, let your atty guide you but do what is best for yourself. If CH13 and its restrictions over 5 years works for you than go for it. For me, it seems drastic in this day and age to put otherwise law abiding citizens under such harsh measures.

Not everyone can do a Chapter 13. First, let's be very very clear. It's not 5 years unless you're a.) over the median and b.) not paying 100% to unsecured creditors. Being under the median gets you 3 years (also, unless paying 100% to unsecured creditors).

Everyone considering bankruptcy, or even looking to do some asset protection planning, should consider everything on the table.

Be careful using the word "law abiding" and "harsh measures". You ask a court to discharge all your responsibility of owing someone money, under contract, in either a Chapter 7 or a Chapter 13. Certainly a breach of contract. You appear to be making this out to be some sort of Government conspiracy or punishment. Actually, the Government is taking your side (the Automatic Stay, the Discharge, and Discharge Injunction are proof of that). So on the one hand, you "feel in this process actually is causing great harm to regular folks who are not connected politically"... on the other hand, you want that same Government to discharge all prior debts due contractually, and to punish anyone who pursues you after that?

Unfortunately, you can't have your cake, and eat it too.

[dakota112]

Don't kid yourself, I am probably older than you and have lived long enough to know and see that Bankruptcy was not legislated by you and me. It was designed by:
1) lawyers to guarantee them a steady flow of high income on the backs of those who have become disadvantaged for whatever reason. If you want to bring up contract law, the very banks themselves owe money they can never repay and are not held to such a standard. You and I are repaying their defaulted loans.
2) Congress made these laws, most of them don't live by the same standard and are in contempt of little people like you and me. I say do what is best for all of you. I myself would not send my child to a public school unless there was absolutely no choice. As for breaking contracts? The govt breaks their contracts all the time. That is why we have such complicated laws, that is why we need so many lawyers in this country to decipher all of this crap and jargon they have created. It is another language purposely designed to deceive those not part of that club. I do feel sorry for those who can't pay for this process. You would think Nancy Pelosi would have included it in her health care coverage, but that would mean lawyers have to take a cut in pay and Tort reform, whats that? Again, I will do anything I have to get over this in a CH7 even if it meant living under the median for 5 years to do it.

[justbroke]

Don't kid yourself, I am probably older than you and have lived long enough to know and see that Bankruptcy was not legislated by you and me. It was designed by:

Okay, you got me... I'm done.

I'll leave you with this though. My mother taught me to never blame others for my plight in the world. There are many doors and opportunities and decisions a person makes throughout their lifetime. Everytime one decides to do anything from buying a house to lying. It's all about choices. I will not sit here and blame my plight on Congress, the laws, or the boogeyman. I will concede that some people received a raw deal in their lives, and for that I'm sorry as a person, a human being.

I too have lived long enough... although what I learned is that I don't make any of the laws. However, I respect the laws. I enjoy the safety of many of the laws. I have even been successful, because of those same laws. I'm discharging about $380K+ in debt because of those same laws. Should I break one, I expect to be punished. If I don't like the laws, I will start (and have started) a grass roots movement to re-elect those who hold office and change the law.

You may not like my stance on this particular topic, but I despise Congress since the 107th, and I believe that the current Congress (111th) should be thrown out. However, I will not through out the baby with the bathwater.