Amazing Meeting with Attorney-- too amazing?

[Moneypenny]

Hi,

I had an intitial meeting at a law firm that i think is good quality. This is for Sacramento CA

The lawyer I spoke with put me completely at ease but I wonder if it is too good to be true (well not all of it is good)

Some things he said:

1. Adamant that once you pass the means test IRS standards have absolutely nothing to do with Schedule J. I am under median by 9-10K

2. This one got me: Reaffirming a car loan is not a slam dunk, you have to show you can feasibly pay it back via Scheduals I & J.

3. Which means, your net disposable income cannot be too high (+166) and not too low either, if you want to reaffirm your car

4. When I asked, doesn't that make me vulnerable to Trustee objections, since I will have to come out with a net disposable close to the line in order to reaffirm, he insisted that Trustees rarely object to anything.

5. Going over my listing of expenses, he actually questioned whether some were not high enough (family of 4). Food $875 not enough. Gas $240 not enough. Did not blink at auto insurance of 288 nor life insurance of $180 for two policies

6. Whenever I focused on I & J, he kind of poo-pooed it saying it all works out as long as you dont have any really unusual expense "like 1000 in medical" or something.

7. Even said the 180 we spend on violin lessons might be okay as educational expenses and that the $158 on exercise was okay as entertainment.

8. Did not seem very concerned that I might be getting a raise after filing, as long as its not like "30,000 dollars"

We spent about an hour and fifteen in a free consultation. I left feeling greatly relieved but the longer I am away I start to get doubts. Could it really be that easy? Or is he hooking me in? I liked that it felt like this was similar to applying for a driver's license in terms of the amount of concern needed. But I am wondering if this is all too good to be true. It also sounds a lot different than what people are saying here about expenses getting picked apart, the need to be in IRS standards in the look forward, and lots of other things.

What do you think?

thanks!
MMP

[BobMango]

What your attorney told you tracks pretty closely with my experience. I filed with a negative DMI of about $600, but needed to show positive DMI in order to get my attorney to sign a reaffirmation. I told the trustee that I was amending my Schedules I & J to show a positive DMI. He said no problem, make sure you get those filed. He actually filed his report of no distribution before I had the amendments filed.

I'd say if you are that far under the median that your expenses would most likely not be challenged. I was only under by a thousand or so.

[Moneypenny]

On the look forward I am very close to median, a bit under. So my expenses still trouble me and I am not sure whether to be reassured by the attorney's no worries attitude or whether I should be worried that he is not concerned enough to ward off any problems.

[albacore44]

sounds like he knows what he's talking about. Also, your in California. they are herding us through like cattle right now.

[AngelinaCatHub]

Hi,

I had an intitial meeting at a law firm that i think is good quality. This is for Sacramento CA

The lawyer I spoke with put me completely at ease but I wonder if it is too good to be true (well not all of it is good) Sounds like a caring man. Ours told us nothing.

Some things he said:

1. Adamant that once you pass the means test IRS standards have absolutely nothing to do with Schedule J. I am under median by 9-10K He is right. You are broke, IRS only wants their fair share (all of it).

2. This one got me: Reaffirming a car loan is not a slam dunk, you have to show you can feasibly pay it back via Scheduals I & J.
This is true. The Judge will see that you will not screw up your bk.

3. Which means, your net disposable income cannot be too high (+166) and not too low either, if you want to reaffirm your car Why even reaffirm if you can pay through. Just in case worse happens you will not be obligated to the car.

4. When I asked, doesn't that make me vulnerable to Trustee objections, since I will have to come out with a net disposable close to the line in order to reaffirm, he insisted that Trustees rarely object to anything. The Trustees and a bk attorney generally know what each other wants to happen. You are paying for good advice. Assume you are getting it until otherwise noted.

5. Going over my listing of expenses, he actually questioned whether some were not high enough (family of 4). Food $875 not enough. Gas $240 not enough. Did not blink at auto insurance of 288 nor life insurance of $180 for two policies I'm not sure of what CA expenses are, but he probably has a mental average remembered from other clients. Check your figures but do not swedge anything. Be honest for sure.

6. Whenever I focused on I & J, he kind of poo-pooed it saying it all works out as long as you dont have any really unusual expense "like 1000 in medical" or something. They can be adjusted later if there is a Trustee question. Even if you are a slight asset case, it probably won't matter.

7. Even said the 180 we spend on violin lessons might be okay as educational expenses and that the $158 on exercise was okay as entertainment. Well that is a judgment call. There are free ways to exercise.

8. Did not seem very concerned that I might be getting a raise after filing, as long as its not like "30,000 dollars" This is conjecture on your part. Unless it happens before your 341, you cannot predict the future. Hope you get a raise.

We spent about an hour and fifteen in a free consultation. I left feeling greatly relieved but the longer I am away I start to get doubts. Could it really be that easy? Or is he hooking me in? I liked that it felt like this was similar to applying for a driver's license in terms of the amount of concern needed. But I am wondering if this is all too good to be true. It also sounds a lot different than what people are saying here about expenses getting picked apart, the need to be in IRS standards in the look forward, and lots of other things. He was generous with his time. Purchase the Chapter 7 book from Nolo Press. It will aid you well.

What do you think?

thanks!
MMP

What do I think? I think you got a hell of a lot better lawyer than we had. Listen to him. C7 is the easiest bk as long as everything is honest and above board. You will fly through. 'Hub

[SMinGA]

I agree that he sounds like a good attorney. From some of the posts I have read - there are people who don't have that much communication with their attorney in their entire case. (From beginning consult to discharge.)

[Moneypenny]

Well I do want so dearly to be herded like cattle.

And thanks for taking the time on my questions! I think it will be helpful for onlookers too.

Sounds like you shared at least one doubt:

where I said: "Even said the 180 we spend on violin lessons might be okay as educational expenses and that the $158 on exercise was okay as entertainment."

you said: "Well that is a judgment call. There are free ways to exercise."

My question is, who makes the judgment call? It does matter very much if its judged one way or the other which is why i feel vulnerable. the lawyer wasnt concerned at all. its true i dont need all these questionable expenses to count but I may need some. So, it worries me a bit.

thanks!

MMP

[BobMango]

On the look forward I am very close to median, a bit under. So my expenses still trouble me and I am not sure whether to be reassured by the attorney's no worries attitude or whether I should be worried that he is not concerned enough to ward off any problems.

You have to remember that you are very emotionally invested in this process. For the attorney, it's another day at the office. He's been through it many times and you just this once (use the fresh start to make sure it's only once, ) You are paying for his education and experience. Nothing you've said in regards to your consult would raise any red flags with me, in fact quite the opposite.

[AngelinaCatHub]

I agree that he sounds like a good attorney. From some of the posts I have read - there are people who don't have that much communication with their attorney in their entire case. (From beginning consult to discharge.)

Yes. And as busy as these guys are, particularly in CA, they really don't need to patronize for business. I have a feel that this guy may be a rare but caring person, from what the OP states. Time will tell, but within 90 days I would bet "Moneypenny" will be living a "new start". 'Hub

[OutofTime]

I had a similar situation when I retained my lawyer this past Monday and filled out my paperwork. My lawyer and his paralegal I worked with have over 15 years experience which made it a breeze as long as I had all the ppwk ready and was under the medain by 3K. It's good to hear this lawyer you spoke to seems like a good fit and when you find the right lawyer, it does seem easier.

[AngelinaCatHub]

Well I do want so dearly to be herded like cattle.

And thanks for taking the time on my questions! I think it will be helpful for onlookers too.

Sounds like you shared at least one doubt:

where I said: "Even said the 180 we spend on violin lessons might be okay as educational expenses and that the $158 on exercise was okay as entertainment."

you said: "Well that is a judgment call. There are free ways to exercise." Yes, this is an opinion as I "personally" do not believe in paying for exercise if I have a yard I can work in for free or paint for the house. I'm not giving a legal opinion, but the lawyer knows "letters of the law" and he is not looking at my opinion. My opinion is; if you needed extra money for food and such, jogg your exercise for free down to the food store and use that money for better things. That is MY opinion and I would never doubt the lawyer at this time.

My question is, who makes the judgment call? It does matter very much if its judged one way or the other which is why i feel vulnerable. the lawyer wasnt concerned at all. its true i dont need all these questionable expenses to count but I may need some. So, it worries me a bit. It is normal to be stressed. We had one VERY BIG advantage. We were so ill informed, we did not even know what the heck the 341 was or was for. So we had absolutely no stress in our ignorance. A blessing in disguise.

thanks!

MMP

My opinion and only my opinion is: You have and will be getting more stress as the natural part of this procedure. Don't willingly tack on imagined worries that you pay your lawyer to do for you. It is HIS job to do your worry.

[researchmode]

Sounds like you found a good lawyer. Mine met with me for over an hour as well whereas other guys in the area spent 20 minutes with me.

I'm worried about my YMCA membership as well. It's only $53/month and includes daily child care for my 2-year old while I work out, access to swim lessons and such for her, and so on. Since I have some health issues I think I'll be able to show that between my health and family history working out isn't optional.

Let us know how it goes and if you decide to use this attorney.

Best of luck.

[AngelinaCatHub]

Sounds like you found a good lawyer. Mine met with me for over an hour as well whereas other guys in the area spent 20 minutes with me.

I'm worried about my YMCA membership as well. It's only $53/month and includes daily child care for my 2-year old while I work out, access to swim lessons and such for her, and so on. Since I have some health issues I think I'll be able to show that between my health and family history working out isn't optional. With all the inclusions especially the health aspect, that would easily be explainable and/or forgivable by the Trustee. You are getting many services for very little money. I also believe the "Y" is a partial not for profit. Maybe not even partial.

Let us know how it goes and if you decide to use this attorney.

Best of luck.

'Hub

[researchmode]

Thanks for the encouragement, 'Hub!

[liz417]

Sounds like this attorney is a good fit for you Also, since you are in CA, why are you reaffirming your car loan? You can do a "ride-through"...who is your car loan with?