Pro Se Stigma

[UpsideDownMI]

So I have officially been called out for filing my chapter 13 case pro se. I spoke with my case manager at the trustee's office today to verify what information that I need to provide before the 341 and was told a pro se chapter 13 in my district has never been confirmed. I was even told that I should tell the trustee at the 341 that I will be retaining counsel. Has anyone else experienced the same type of negative stigma with filing a 13 pro se?

Three days in and am already tired of dealing with the whole "you should retain a lawyer" routine. If I need a lawyer I will retain one when the need arises. All ofI feel how have done my homework by the information that I have learned on this site and other resources.

This negativity about how it will be impossible for me to succeed, actually increases my desire to see this thru pro se.

[frogger]

Good luck. Sounds like you're going to need it!

[HHM]

It is common on the trustee side to strongly encourage pro se chapter 13'ers to get an attorney. There really are just too many pitfalls. Keep in mind, the trustee is your adversary in the BK process, so they cannot give you legal advice about what should and should not be done.

But if it is true that a pro se chatper 13 has never been confirmed, that is a bad sign for you, sorry to say. But nevertheless, good luck. Hopefully you have a stash of cash somwhere to get hire an attorney if this case goes sideways.

[justbroke]

The Plan is the most difficult thing for a Chapter 13 pro se filer to get confirmed. That's because the Plan is both a contract (with your creditors) and becomes a de facto Court Order of what you are to adhere to. Some Districts publish a form-based Chapter 13 Plan, which makes it easier to comply with the District's requirements. Other Districts don't have a standard form, and/or provide very little guidance.

I was lucky on mine, because I spent (way too much money and) a lot of time on researching the top attorneys in the District and looking at the structure and format of the Plans. I actually received a compliment from a top attorney who stated that they were trying to find good language for the portion of the Plan known as the "Provisions". (There was one they really liked and it was on the fact that the Trustee required all payments to be paid through the plan, so all on-time payments to the Trustee are on-time payments to the creditor. )

I'm not willing to be that no pro se debtors have ever had a plan confirmed in Michigan, but I'd side on the fact, that it's just probably extremely uncommon.

As HHM wrote, please have a Plan B ready in case you need to get assistance with your plan (by retaining an attorney). I would certainly love to be in your District and be up to the challenge. If you're really up for the challenge, you need to present a Plan... well thought out, and that meets the needs of the District, Remember, it's not the Trustee who approves a plan!!! It's the Judge! (Yes, you can get a plan confirmed even with a Trustee objection.)

[UpsideDownMI]

Thanks for the replies! I was mainly just blowing off steam.

I also do not believe that there have not been any pro se 13 confirmed in my district and agree that it is most likely very rare. I do have to say that after reading almost every court opinion issued in my district over the past 3 years that almost every pro se case dismissal in my district has been due to prepetion credit counseling certificate not being dated until after the petition was filed.

My plan was filed using the "model plan" that I got from the Eastern District of Michigan website. I also downloaded several dozen plans that were filed in my district from Pacer and used them as reference while completing my plan. That being said, I believe that all of the plan provisions that are required/expected in my district are accounted for.

I have also download several objections to confirmation filed by my trustee, so that I could get an idea of what items/issues may bring an objection my way. I have found that the trustee uses a standard checksheet for confirmation. If any item on the checksheet is checked "no", the trustee files an objection to confirmation. Only if all items are checked "yes" will the trustee recommend confirmation. I have found very few cases in which the trustee actually recommended confirmation.

I personally feel that the only thing that could kill my case is if I was unsuccessful in stripping my 2nd mortgage lien, as my plan is dependent on treating my 2nd mortgage as wholly unsecured. This is because I would not be able to fund a chapter 13 plan if I were required to make payments on the 2nd mortgage. This would push me into a chapter 7.

I have filed the AP (local rule to lien strip in E.D.M.) and served my summons and complaint with the attached exhibits to my lien holder. The lien holder has 30 days from my filing date to file a response to my complaint. I am working under the assumption that there will be a response filed, which would result in this matter going to trial so I am trying to learn everything I can about AP's now.

[justbroke]

Very nicely done! You're speaking my language!

[HHM]

Have you accounted for the "adequate protection" that the second mortgage holder is going to request? Even many newer attorney's get fouled up by this little provision, if you are going to strip a second, you often need to provide what the code refers to adequate protection payments to the 2nd mortgage holder.

[justbroke]

For what it's worth, I didn't provide for adequate protection in my lien strip. However, we can lien strip not only by motion (contested matter) but can do so without a hearing either (via negative noticing). So mine was over in 30 days anyhow.

HHM's point does resonate though. Since your Complaint to Determine Secured Status and Avoid Lien is much more formal, the lender could seek adequate protection if the property is declining in value.

You (UpsideDownMI) may want to look at some cases where the lien strip was done, and whether the first (or amended) plan(s) provided adequate protection to the second lienholder.

[UpsideDownMI]

Adequate protection is provided to secured creditors in my plan in the form of full coverage insurance only (no payments). This a standard provision in the "model plan". I am required to provide evidence that all secured property is fully insured.

I have not found any cases that have been required to provide adequate protection payments, but I will do some more research on the issue.