top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

not going as planned

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by floridian View Post
    it looks like i made a serious error by posting my opinions, i thought that was what this forum is about..... and opened myself up to disdain from those who like being under a trustees thumb!

    I didn't read any disdain in any comments directed to your posts. If a person has a differing opinion than yours it's simply a differing opinion.

    I hope everything works out well for you. Reading your posts I sense a lot of frustration.
    Well, I did. Every one of 'em. Mostly I remember the last one. The wild finish. A guy standing on a station platform in the rain with a comical look in his face because his insides have been kicked out. -Rick

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by krielly View Post
      Interesting. We filed because we wanted to keep our non-exempt assets.

      We filed old law, so i'm not that familiar with new law, and whether or not you can protect non-exempt assets.....I was under the assumption that you could, if you could pay for them.......
      Yes, you can protect non-exempt assets in new law 13 (however, if she was making payments on the motorcycle, a trustee may not allow it as a budget expense).

      Floridian: I am sorry you feel we are harping on you, but this forum is not about codependency; its about providing insight, advice, and calling it like we see it; in short, to provide some perspective. The most difficult thing people have in BK is keeping perspective, and I, and apparently others felt your post in this thread lost perspective.

      A perfect example
      I'm not interested in a long, hard, 5 year look into my personal business.
      Its the wrong comparison, of course everyone would like to file a 7 or a 13, but that is not reality and it is the wrong comparison. You don't compare a 13 to a 7, you compare a 13 to other "realistic" options or doing nothing. As was previously stated, 5 years to get out of debt, or 10 years of being a slave to your credit cards and probably not getting out of debt. Which is really better?

      Comment


        #18
        , Floridian: I am sorry you feel we are harping on you, but this forum is not about codependency; its about providing insight, advice, and calling it like we see it; in short, to provide some perspective.
        my point was, that i went into this thinking i was educated to the basics ... by that, i mean that i went on a bunch of lawyers blogs and did a lot of google on bk....
        however, it wasnt until i came to this forum and read some of the real world experiences, that i realized that its more complicated than i thought.... i didnt realize that the trustees had the authority to arbitrarily put you in what ever chapter they want...it appears to be a beaurocracy of the highest order...

        kind of reminds me of the movie "caine mutiny".. the ship is going down in the typhoon and the capt is trying to figure out who ate his quart of strawberries....
        Last edited by HHM; 02-20-2009, 02:32 PM.
        "it looks like i picked a bad day to give up sniffing glue"! [McKroskey, airplane]

        Comment


          #19
          I didn't realize that the trustees had the authority to arbitrarily put you in what ever chapter they want
          Well, actually, that is not true. You need to read between the lines...the people on this forum who got pushed into a chapter 13 from a 7, really shouldn't have been 7's in the first place. They either poor pro se cases or they got bad legal representation. The rules on 7 vs 13 are, for the most part, quite clear (unfair, yes, but they are predictable).

          Comment

          bottom Ad Widget

          Collapse
          Working...
          X