Question about lack of response from Trustee.

[tigergem]

As Pro Se'ers we are required to negotiate with other attorneys, correct?

So. What do I do about the trustee's refusal to answer a simple question?

When I called the bankruptcy clerk's office the other day about the Trustee's Objection to Exemptions (my social security bank accounts and cash on hand) she told me to call the trustee and ask what was the basis of his exemption.

So I didn't call, I sent the assistant an email. Because I hate calling the trustee's office. They are so... soooo..... yeah. Anyway. I sent an email.

Hi Kelly,

Can you please get back to me on this?

Mr. T did not state a basis for his objection to my exemption under 522(d)(10)(A) of the bank accounts and cash on hand.

Did he object because those funds are social security benefits and not actually property of the estate under Section 407 of the Social Security Act?

Or would he just rather see those funds exempted under 522(d)(5)?

Can you please let me know?

Thank you very much for your time and attention.

Me, Debtor, Pro Se
(phone #)

No response. Isn't the trustee's office required to deal with me in good faith? Was this an unreasonable question? Or is it his job to stonewall everybody?

[justbroke]

No response. Isn't the trustee's office required to deal with me in good faith? Was this an unreasonable question? Or is it his job to stonewall everybody?

I have found the Trustee's office the most unresponsive of anyone.

I worked directly with my automobile creditor's attorney and talked to "his" assistant. Assistant tells me that I'm asking a legal question so I need to talk to the attorney. The assistant tells me that he'll call me back in a few hours. Sure enough, the attorney himself calls and we discuss their position! That saved me a ton of time, and he even told me under what caselaw he thought they'd win. I withdraw my valuation (which was the objection).

As for my Trustee... let me put it this way. I have written 6 letters to them and called as many times. I have never been called back, and have never received a written response to anything that I posed to them in writing(which they claim they require). Never. They never even answer their phones, always to voicemail.

You tell me.

[tigergem]

Well that is just evil. Fine. We play ball then. I try to think the best of people until they act like idjuts. Twice. There are no three strikes in my sandbox.

[mtbc]

While my trustee was nice enough in person at the 341, I wrote to him twice beforehand, asking what they wanted to see from me, offering to provide whatever they liked, etc. Never heard a thing back from them.

[tigergem]

I have to retract all the bad stuff I thought about him. All of it. Did you see what he sent me???

http://www.bkforum.com/showthread.php?t=51630

[justbroke]

I saw it. But... I still don't like him. Isn't he the one that filed an objection to your exemptions, objection to your confirmation, and some other things?

[tigergem]

Yes, that's him. lol. I asked him about that when I wrote him back:

Also, I had earlier sent Kelly an email about the objection you filed with regard to my exemptions on 1/26. My question was this: Did you object because those funds are social security benefits and not actually property of the estate under Section 407 of the Social Security Act? Or would you rather see those funds exempted under 522(d)(5)?

Understanding the basis of your objection would help me to draft my response, which I must do.

(Which I am doing, as a Motion for Summary Judgment)

(Am I sly?)

[justbroke]

Sly as an attorney.

[tigergem]

lol. That's funny. My eldest son is in law school. I have to stay smarter than my kids, right? (And no I haven't asked him a single question about this case. Not one!)

[tigergem]

[justbroke]

While it's not the "only way", it's probably an "easier way" if you have funds protected under 42 USC 407.

[tigergem]

Oh he fully acknowledged the 407 thing, but he said he didn't think my judge kept up with that case law.

He also says that he generally doesn't object to claims because he isn't the one with all the facts and intricate knowledge of the accounts. Very sensible, I suppose, unless there is a blatant violation, like no documentation submitted with the claim.

[tigergem]

Yeah, I thought about it... and you know what? I am not going to let that email get to my head. I set out to file my Chapter 13 with a very specific goal in mind, and that was not to learn new lawyering skills or to "teach that guy" a thing or two. I think it is wiser to go with amending the Schedule C to appease him on this point. Wiser use of my time, too. I definitely think my time NOT spent on a battle over exemptions is definitely worth the $26.00 plus postage. Plus the chance to screw it up and p-off both the judge and the trustee? Nah. I think I'll pass.

Where I really DO need to focus my time and attention is on my claims objections, of which I now have TWO.

[justbroke]

I only fight when there's money on the table that I deserve, and caselaw supports it. You're right, if a minor Schedule C change fixes it... this is the path of least resistance and what most attorneys would do. However, if the Trustee had said no, you can't exempt it at all... FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT!

[tigergem]

No, he actually said he didn't want the money, and he completely agreed that it is covered under the Social Security Act, IF I want to prove that isn't comingled. And it's not. And I can prove it. But I don't have huge confidence in my own motion practice right now and this is not where I want to experiment. I have gone to pretty great lengths to prepare a motion for summary judgment but it's been scary and I am unsure of myself. Now that I have a better understanding of how this guy thinks, I think it is unnecessary.