Bankruptcy Forum

New approach to a Chapter 13

keepmine
07-12-2008, 05:00 AM
Wasn't really sure how to title this one. Slick lawyer didn't seem approiate! Anyway, here it is:

http://www.¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿¿/2008/07/10/avoiding-good-faith-objections-to-chapter-13-plans/

Avoiding “Good Faith” Objections to Chapter 13 Plans
By Craig Andresen, Attorney at Law on Jul 10, 2008 in Bankruptcy Practice and Procedure, Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, Discharge, What Can and Cannot Be Forgiven, General Bankruptcy Information

Sometimes a chapter 13 case is filed, instead of chapter 7, due to concerns over possible non-dischargeability complaints. Perhaps the debtor has incurred large credit charges or balance transfers recently, or maybe he or she owes a large debt to a creditor who might claim fraud, or a wilful or malicious injury. If there are creditors who are upset with the debtor over misconduct, chapter 7 may be an invitation to expensive bankruptcy court litigation over dischargeability issues; hence the decision to file chapter 13 instead. But what about the possibility of an objection to the chapter 13 plan, or an objection to dischargeability of the debt in chapter 13? It’s a good idea to minimize the chances of such objections or complaints, if possible, through careful drafting of the initial chapter 13 plan.

This can be accomplished by proposing, along with the initial filing, a generous chapter 13 plan providing for full payment of all creditors, or something close to full payment. This may induce an otherwise unhappy creditor into believing that time and money should not be wasted objecting to a chapter 13 plan which, after all, provides for a large payment to the creditor. This tactic may also induce the creditor to forego filing a non-dischargeability complaint within the mandatory 60 day deadline, which runs from the date of the creditors meeting, due to the creditor’s expectation of a large payment under the plan.

Once the initial chapter 13 plan is confirmed, most courts will consider the issue of the debtor’s good faith in filing the case to have been finally determined. Similarly, the running of the 60 day non-dischargeability complaint deadline will prevent a creditor from ever raising this issue later. If creditors can be “lulled” into sleeping on their rights by filing an initial chapter 13 plan which proposes large payments, the debtor gains the advantage of getting a plan confirmed, the certainty of being able to remain in chapter 13, and possibly the certainty of being able to discharge all of his or her debts.

The next step is to modify the chapter 13 plan to consist of a much lower monthly payment, which now will represent what the debtor can actually afford. Once a decent interval has elapsed from the filing of the case and confirmation of the initial chapter 13 plan, the debtor can file a motion to modify the monthly plan payment to an amount consisting of what his or her monthly household budget shows is affordable. This modified plan might provide that creditors will receive only pennies on the dollar toward their claims. However, because a plan has been previously confirmed, any creditor objecting to the modified plan will be prevented from arguing good faith issues. Instead, the creditor will be limited to asking the court to examine whether the debtor is proposing, in the new plan, to pay all he or she can reasonably afford into the plan. This means the legal issues have changed from good faith, or non-dischargeability of the debts, into a simple issue which favors the debtor: whether the new payment amount is consistent with the debtor’s budget. If the motion to modify the plan is carefully drafted, this is an issue upon which the debtor can usually hope to prevail.

The debtor should be prepared to explain that the intial plan was proposed in the sincere belief that he or she could afford the high plan payments, through “belt tightening” or other sacrifices, and that after attempting to perform under the plan, it became apparent that the high payments were not affordable after all, despite the debtor’s good intentions. This should help the debtor avoid the appearance of having unfairly manipulated the legal process just to obtain confirmation of the intial, high-payment chapter 13 plan.

HHM
07-12-2008, 05:05 AM
Interesting, but I wonder if he has ever actually tried to do it.

Frogge
07-12-2008, 07:25 AM
This seems like a good idea, I would like to know if it's been done before.

chloe0724
07-12-2008, 11:30 AM
This doesn't seem to be fesable. Why would the trustee approve the plan if you clearly couldn't afford the large payuments you proposed. And lord forbid, you get stuck with a high payment!!

lrprn
07-13-2008, 09:09 AM
Sometimes gaming the system just to see if it can be done can leave a filer in a world of hurt.

Some trustees are very reluctant to amend a Ch 13 filing, especially if the filer just filed and nothing significant has changed since the original filing. And what is the filer going to do while the amendment winds its way through the decision process trying to make a huge Ch 13 payment they really can't afford? Talk about setting yourself up for failure - personally except in some very unusual circumstances, it doesn't seem worth the gamble.

HHM
07-13-2008, 10:02 AM
Yeah, ultimately, I see a feasibility problem and a court would likely reject the "generous" plan. The main problem is how do you really show (and how does the debtor make) a high plan payment for the first plan, then come back 6 months and reduce it without really showing changed circumstances.

It's an interesting idea, but I don't see how it would work in a practical sense.

stopcallingus
07-14-2008, 09:41 AM
I am wondering if this is what my atty is trying to do. After my bk payment, mortgage, child support, insurance, daycare and utilities I am left to feed our family of 4 on $376 a month. The trustee has filed an objection to the plan and we have a hearing July 29. I can't see anyone approving a plan like that though. That is just asking for failure. The paperwork we signed when we filed was blank and they went back and plugged in the numbers later. They called us to tell us what our payment would be.

kornellred
07-14-2008, 11:43 AM
The vast majority of creditors are large banks. They have neither the time nor the inclination to object to any Chapter 13 plans or the percentages they will or will not receive.
BK attorneys purposely low-ball the initial payment plan and then let the standing trustees submit their objections. Then a process of discovery begins, and a plan will eventually be arrived at and confirmed.

holding on
07-15-2008, 12:56 PM
This sounds awfully shaky. Anyone who is willing to roll the dice that the trustee will indeed amend the plan has got some guts. Doesn't the 'clock' restart for creditors to object and new notices get mailed to creditors when a plan amendment is submitted? I know a good percentage of creditors don't object but that there seems to be another roll of the dice.

HHM
07-15-2008, 04:29 PM
This sounds awfully shaky. Anyone who is willing to roll the dice that the trustee will indeed amend the plan has got some guts. Doesn't the 'clock' restart for creditors to object and new notices get mailed to creditors when a plan amendment is submitted? I know a good percentage of creditors don't object but that there seems to be another roll of the dice.

That is somewhat of the point of the plan...the clock DOES NOT start over as far as "objections to discharge" and amendments, all the creditors can do during an amendment is object to the amendment, but unsecured creditors practically have no grounds to object to the plan, or amended plan itself.

The problem with the plan are not the creditors but the BK trustee and BK court.