Hi Guys,
It seems slightly anti-climatic because I was expecting it. But it is really good to have the paper in front of me.
[I wound up going to court today because I hadn't received word; and they eventually came up with a Discharge [Official Form 18 the most impt form]. One small odd thing: the clerk told me they are only sending parts 1 & 2, and that I'd have to go back to get part 3 (which concerns amounts of discharge). (Maggie at Public Counsel said she never heard of it.]
Anyway, [this is sort of bad] one of my first thoughts was that I can't file bk again for 8 years.
[One could seriously reflect on that. Suppose you're hit (just out of bk) with a catastrophic illness; no way of paying your debts.
Let's not think about that now. ]
I like the wording of the discharge:
"It appearing that the debtor is entitled to a discharge, IT IS ORDERED:
The debtor is granted a discharge under ..."
There is a perplexity here perhaps. Suppose the debtor was (really?) not entitled to a discharge (due, say, to undetected fraulence which later came to light). Since the Court, by ordering the discharge, makes it the case that it is discharged, based merely on it "appearing that the debtor is entitled" then the discharge can't be touched. [The underlying principle is a peculiar one. If it appears that X, then X.]
[[I wish this forum could now transform into a moneymaking-type forum. I've begun looking for some sort of employment. I need to earn some income quickly. This job searching business is foreign to me. As the economic reports get bleaker and bleaker. I think this week I may go register as a film extra, and see what that's about.]]
Thanks, all of you, for helping me get here. I can't imagine what it would have been like without the forum.
Grassfish
It seems slightly anti-climatic because I was expecting it. But it is really good to have the paper in front of me.
[I wound up going to court today because I hadn't received word; and they eventually came up with a Discharge [Official Form 18 the most impt form]. One small odd thing: the clerk told me they are only sending parts 1 & 2, and that I'd have to go back to get part 3 (which concerns amounts of discharge). (Maggie at Public Counsel said she never heard of it.]
Anyway, [this is sort of bad] one of my first thoughts was that I can't file bk again for 8 years.
[One could seriously reflect on that. Suppose you're hit (just out of bk) with a catastrophic illness; no way of paying your debts.
Let's not think about that now. ]
I like the wording of the discharge:
"It appearing that the debtor is entitled to a discharge, IT IS ORDERED:
The debtor is granted a discharge under ..."
There is a perplexity here perhaps. Suppose the debtor was (really?) not entitled to a discharge (due, say, to undetected fraulence which later came to light). Since the Court, by ordering the discharge, makes it the case that it is discharged, based merely on it "appearing that the debtor is entitled" then the discharge can't be touched. [The underlying principle is a peculiar one. If it appears that X, then X.]
[[I wish this forum could now transform into a moneymaking-type forum. I've begun looking for some sort of employment. I need to earn some income quickly. This job searching business is foreign to me. As the economic reports get bleaker and bleaker. I think this week I may go register as a film extra, and see what that's about.]]
Thanks, all of you, for helping me get here. I can't imagine what it would have been like without the forum.
Grassfish
Bankruptcy Wizard
But, don't worry about that.
Comment