I Really Hosed This One Up!

[tigergem]

Apparently so. But every district and every trustee is different. I was not about to argue with the trustee. And there is a one shot $26.00 amendment fee - no matter how many things you change at one time, they charge you $26.00 (my district, anyway). So, since I had to change some addresses on the matrix anyway, I went ahead and amended every little thing she asked for and every little thing I could think of that might need amending, just to put a fine point on it. There was no change to my plan though.

[tigergem]

I'm with JoeBankrupt! Just worry about what you had on the day you filed until the trustee asks for something different. That's what I did. Don't worry about it. Your trustee might not ask for those amendments.

[Walter]

Actually, it's going to be $136/month (because of the $50 you left off). This may put you in the "Presumption of Abuse" category. If your unsecured debt is less than $32,650 ($136 x 60 x 4), then the presumption of abuse exists and you'll have to overcome it.

Could you tell me a little more about this $136 x 60 x 4 forumla?

This thread has me VERY nervous now; not only because I didn't include the $25 stimuls either (just found out about it after reading this thread and asking my mom, a non-debtor spouse on the form), but because their Schedule I - with her unemployment compensation - is crushing Schedule J, making their DMI seem...astronomical compared to others.

..a little background:

Completing the paperwork for my father (pro se), NY so not a community state, and filing alone, not joint.

Social Security: $1,245/month
Non-debtor spouse: $1,180 unemployment (with the $25 stimulus now added in)

That's their only income.

I thought SS is totally exempt and her (mom) unemployment doesn't come into play, given they are not filing jointly. So assumed the unemployment compensation was only used for the means test (their means calculation was less than a third of the state median family income).

Schedule J (which I'll have to revisit, since I WAY underestimates a few categories, like medical, transportation, food, etc) reflected monthly expenditures of ~$1,600.

So this would reflect a DMI of *gasp* $825!

"then the presumption of abuse exists and you'll have to overcome it."

Umm, how?

I looked at this as a 'judgement proof case,' since 100% of his SS income is exempt and no assets case (after using the $50K NY homestead for the house, valued at $55K, more or less now, so entitled to $27.5K in equity). And since mom is not filing, again, I assumed her income was off the table, too.

So from a 'means perspective,' they are more than golden, but once you roll up the unemployment compensation, they are dead in the water?

I am not sure how to proceed now...thoughts?

[Walter]

...and just to clarify, is DMI calculated from the means test calculation where SS is off the table, or from Schedule I, where it is included? *confused now*

Schedule I: ~$2,425 together (filer + non-debtor spouse)
Form 22A (Means Test): $1,180 <---"CMI?"

Big difference and now I have no idea what I am doing..thought I had it all figured out until I completed Schedule I.

[justbroke]

Could you tell me a little more about this $136 x 60 x 4 forumla?

If your disposable income, multiplied by 60... is 25% or more of your unsecured debt... then the "presumption of abuse" exists. This is just part of the Means Test formula. Basically, there's a rebuttable presumption of abuse if your disposable income is more than $109.58/month (and less than $182.50/month). However, that presumption can be rebutted / overcome, by either being less than 25% of your total unsecured debt, or "special circumstances".

I thought SS is totally exempt and her (mom) unemployment doesn't come into play, given they are not filing jointly. So assumed the unemployment compensation was only used for the means test (their means calculation was less than a third of the state median family income).

It's exempt for the means test, but there's more than the Means Test.

"then the presumption of abuse exists and you'll have to overcome it."

You can't overcome it when the disposable income is greater than $182.50/month.

[QUOTE=Walter;371354]I looked at this as a 'judgement proof case,' since 100% of his SS income is exempt and no assets case (after using the $50K NY homestead for the house, valued at $55K, more or less now, so entitled to $27.5K in equity). And since mom is not filing, again, I assumed her income was off the table, too. [/QUTOE]There's no such thing as "judgment proof". A person can be collection proof. However, judgments are nasty and can last for tens of years (upon renewal).

Perhaps consulting an attorney or three would be appropriate.

[Walter]

Perhaps consulting an attorney or three would be appropriate.

Thanks, justbroke...might just have to break down and do just that.

I am now researching how the 'current income' is handled on Schedule I, thinking:

1.) Not applying/drawing unemployment effective Jan 31, 2009 would enable us to put $0 income on non-filing spouse's side in a February filing

or

2.) Mom has no insurance, but lots of issues that have been neglected, since Cobra/other insurance wanted $900/month she couldn't swing

...which gave me perhaps the best option: have her setup an annual insurance policy with Cobra (or any one that is > $800 (MDI) we need to shave off)???

This would give her much-needed insurance (even if carried only up until the discharge), would allow to keep drawing the remaining couple months of unemployment, and would put us in the red when considering Schedule I vs Schedule J...

Does this sound like a viable option? ...all hangs on the rules on Schedule J, I guess...researching now. ;)

[justbroke]

Does this sound like a viable option? ...all hangs on the rules on Schedule J, I guess...researching now. ;)

These are all the types of "strategic" Bankruptcy pre-planning things that can be done. An attorney would be better at their effectiveness in your particular District. (What happens in one District... usually stays in that District. )

[Walter]

Point well-taken. Thanks again. ;)

Perhaps since I have all the paperwork done and wouldn't need reprensentation, per se (to go pro se, per se ;)), maybe a 'strategic planning' session (or three) would be much cheaper than the $1,700 quotes for the full monty preperation/representation route...

Pennies on the dollar not being forced into 13, I guess. ;)