Does having an attorney in and of itself ward off possible objections?

[Goldfish]

Hi Guys,

I'm new to all of this (including using blogs and posting); and OH so very happy The Forum is here!

I'll be filing Chpt 7 quite soon. I have many questions (many of which are being addressed here), but I'll simply initiate my entry on the site with a simple question-- OK, two.

I'm not sure yet whether to file pro se or not. I regard my case as rather simple. No asset case. Credit card debt, $30K plus. Easily pass the LACK of means test. Unemployed for some time. Current on payments.

Except for a few charges within the last 3 months (e.g. airfare to visit aged and sick parents at x-mas, gas, and some fairly minor charges, I really don't have much which I think creditors could object to. [But I must dig out my recent statements.]

So, do I really have need of a attorney? ('m dealing with basically 3 c/c companies: amex, BofA, Chase.) (The attorney probably wouldn't handle litigation (for his initial fee) and would advise settling for half.)

One attorney-office said I could use form 707 to explain the airfare.

I just wonder whether having an attorney signed on (the bare signature) will ward off possible objections. (Or court actions to try to intimidate me.) [Incidentally, I did find an attorney who seems pretty good and reasonable in price; talked a bit by phone.]

I'm not sure whether it would be very helpful to have a lawyer. I'm trying to reduce expenses.

[Also, to just make sure I'm clear: Even if I only paid utility bills or car insurance on credit card close to the time of filing totaling less than $500, this would still be problem because of my insolvent status? Why shouldn't I take the risk of objection? What do I really have to lose? If recent charges are overall low, and objections rare, and they can only question the recent charges, why not do it? i.e. use the card (even though close to filing) while making some mimimum payments until I file.

Thanks very much in advance. [My understanding is to open different threads for different sorts of questions.] I look forward to further communications.

M.

[tigergem]

Bankruptcy Code Section 523 (a)(2) provides that:

consumer debts owed to a single creditor and aggregating more than $500 for luxury goods or services incurred by an individual debtor on or within 90 days before the order for relief under this title are presumed to be nondischargeable; and cash advances aggregating more than $750 that are extensions of consumer credit under an open end credit plan obtained by an individual debtor on or within 70 days before the order for relief under this title, are presumed to be nondischargeable;

The Code also provides that the term “luxury goods or services” does not include goods or services reasonably necessary for the support or maintenance of the debtor or a dependent of the debtor.

However, Code Section 523(a)(2) also includes another test to determine the dischargeability of credit card debt. The following debts are non-dischargeable:

money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by—
(A) false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;

(B) use of a statement in writing—
(i) that is materially false;
(ii) respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;
(iii) on which the creditor to whom the debtor is liable for such money, property, services, or credit reasonably relied; and
(iv) that the debtor caused to be made or published with intent to deceive;

So, what the Code provides is that non-essential credit card debts to any one creditor totaling $500 or more and incurred within 90 days prior to filing are presumed non-dischargeable. And credit card debts of any amount, incurred at any time prior to filing may be deemed non-dischargeable if the creditor can prove that the debt was incurred under false pretenses (i.e., that the consumer used the card when he knew or should have known that he would be unable to pay back the debt).

The 90 day/$500 debt to any one creditor is a fairly easy argument for the credit card companies – those are hard to defend. The false pretenses/false representation issue is more difficult for a credit card company to win because they have to prove what you knew or should have known.

Quoted from: http://www.thebklawyer.com/thebkblog...me-guidelines/

I hope that helps you understand your situation better.