Message on Answering Machine about coming to house

[pcn]

Maybe it's a latent gene I have, but I seem to always think in "what if" or "why" terms. Or maybe it's related to my profession. But anyways. If the court seems to think a person is fundamentally dishonest and wants to send an appraiser to check up on them, what is to prevent that same dishonest person from hiding major items of vale before this appraiser comes to visit?

[neverpc]

I imagine there are many who do attempt to hide assets, but (a) you have to have somewhere to hide them and (b) you should always assume that any purchases you made on credit, regardless of whether or not you are able to conceal them from view, can be traced back to you through the creditors. You obviously also risk having your case dismissed if your integrity is in question. In general, I think that, by the time most people file for bankruptcy, they are so far in over their heads that they are more than willing to turn over material possessions. The appeal of "stuff" is greatly diminished once you have gotten to the point you're willing to ruin your credit and face the shame that filing bankruptcy brings.

[neverpc]

and, no, my husband and I are not "fundamentally dishonest."

[StartingOver08]

I imagine there are many who do attempt to hide assets, but (a) you have to have somewhere to hide them and (b) you should always assume that any purchases you made on credit, regardless of whether or not you are able to conceal them from view, can be traced back to you through the creditors. You obviously also risk having your case dismissed if your integrity is in question. In general, I think that, by the time most people file for bankruptcy, they are so far in over their heads that they are more than willing to turn over material possessions. The appeal of "stuff" is greatly diminished once you have gotten to the point you're willing to ruin your credit and face the shame that filing bankruptcy brings.

I agree that the appeal of stuff is gone once you are truly ready to file - and hopefully for a long time thereafter!

I don't have one bit of shame, (anymore!) for filing. That dissappeared when it became evident to me that there was no way I could pay back the $1M in debt I had in place with my now very reduced income. As one of the previous posters has said: It's a business decision.

As to those that assume that if the UST is involved than "something must be wrong", all I can say is NO, they are just doing their jobs too. That's why I bring up the fact that if you have documentation, you are fine. If you have some of the red flag triggers (high income, high debt, small business, etc) you will have UST involvment. If you have documentation and everything is on your petition, there is nothing to worry about.

That particular Trustee in the Middle District of Fl has a national reputation for sending out appraisers because she is looking to get any sort of asset to turn the "no asset "cases into "asset" cases because it gets her more money. Gets the creditors more money too, but only if she finds something worthwhile. The Trustees get the funds first...so she is doing what's in her best interest. Sometimes we forget that the Trustee's office is a business too.

[beachymama]

Lately, no action on Pacer about the inventory done 12-7-09. Today I noticed that there was some action. On 12-26, there is a request or application to hire the appraiser to look at my personal property. The date was changed from October and replaced with the 12-26-09 date and signed by trustee (I guess they are covering their tracks?). Then an approval of the hiring of the lady to do my appraisal dated 12-31-09. So is this just paperwork to cover the appraisal done 12-7-09???

I am discharged but this is still ongoing I guess.