Judges and Trustees Confusion

[catwhisperer]

I'm confused. I thought when you filed you went before a trustee. I have seen some threads where people mention judges throwing out trustees decisions to dismiss cases - I don't understand, can someone explain

[keepmine]

The vast majority of bk's are routine and administered by a panel trustee.
In the event the bk is not routine, the districts Master Trustee may intervene. In the event one side or the other does not agree with a ruling from a trustee, they have the right to appeal to a BK court judge.

[so-beyond-broke]

If you file pro-se & re-affirm a debt be prepared to see the judge

Well if you file pro-se and reaffirm on a debt,then you will definetely have to go before the judge right before your discharge so that you are aware of your rights. I saw the judge last week regarding my reaffirmation of my car and he stated that Congress did this so that people who filed w/o attys were aware of what's going on and not be taken advantage of. Evidently, people have been taken advantage of in the past and this short one minute hearing is to protect the bk filer's interest.

sbb

Every Bankruptcy case is assigned a Trustee and a Judge. The Trustee doesn't have final say on all of his/her decisions, they must be approved by the Judge that has been assigned to your case.

You will likely never see the Judge, unless there is a Motion filed by the Trustee that you would like to attend the hearing or appeal the Motion.

[catwhisperer]

Well if you file pro-se and reaffirm on a debt,then you will definetely have to go before the judge right before your discharge so that you are aware of your rights. I saw the judge last week regarding my reaffirmation of my car and he stated that Congress did this so that people who filed w/o attys were aware of what's going on and not be taken advantage of. Evidently, people have been taken advantage of in the past and this short one minute hearing is to protect the bk filer's interest.

sbb

Well, that's good to hear!!! We've heard that the trustee that would be doing our case is VERY STRICT! We've been afraid that we'd get a real hard nose trustee and would be stuck with that, now it is good to hear that we would have some way to contest an unreasonable trustee.

[djk]

Well, that's good to hear!!! We've heard that the trustee that would be doing our case is VERY STRICT! We've been afraid that we'd get a real hard nose trustee and would be stuck with that, now it is good to hear that we would have some way to contest an unreasonable trustee.

I think there is a local trustee based on jurisdiction and another trustee
that oversees the locals. Each case has 2 trustees. I know you plan on
Pro Se but I'd suggest you either write a certified letter or send an
email to the trustee assigned to your case shortly after filing and simply
ask if she/he has received all the documentation needed. Do this about
3 weeks before the 341.

[edwards2]

Under the old law you had a BK trustee and a U.S. trustee assigned to your case. If you were fortunate your case got through the BK trustee w/o a problem and your case was sanctioned by the U.S. Trustee. We were told if the BK trustee had no issues with your case you were pretty much home free. Not in our case. The BK trustee seemed to be okay with our case and lo and behold the U.S. Trustee wanted more documentation, etc...and we ended up in a 2004 Exam. Not the norm according to people who were in the know. Keep in mind too that our case was heard right on the brink of the new law taking effect and the trustees and courts admitted they were "trying out" the new law by making examples out of some of us. Fortunately, our story had a happy ending and our case was discharged and closed. I totally agree you should give the trustee assigned to your case a heads up and find out if he/she has all the paperwork they need. Dont give them any reason to challenge anything in your case. Some of the trustees pounce on anything that looks the slightest bit different. Good luck...