Schedule I & J don't match plan

[whiscox]

We received an objection from the trustee that stated they objected to the fact that our plan did not match the disposable income derived from Schedules I & J. Our attorney told me not to worry and that they didn't match because we own two vehicles and we are allowed the IRS deduction of owning the vehicles which is not accounted for in the schedule J (expenses). I cannot remember the form he used for the plan payment (I think it was the means test), but he used that as the basis for our plan. All of the other deductions in the form he used for the plan are accounted for in the schedule J except for the cost of ownership for the vehicles.

My concern is that if that were the case then why would the trustee object to it, and did my attorney make a mistake by not making the two of them match? Also, if they are supposed to match is there a way to fix it after the fact to account for from what I can tell is completely allowed by the process? Any help is greatly appreciated as there is a huge gap in the two payments and I am not sure we can make it work with what the trustee is proposing.

[Pandora]

if you actually own the vehicles outright - then you cannot claim ownership as an expense (IRS Standards) because there is no expense (i.e., no car payment). You can claim gas and vehicle maintenance, etc however - that is allowed but again, its at the trustee's discretion to approve the amount you claim.

[LadyInTheRed]

if you actually own the vehicles outright - then you cannot claim ownership as an expense (IRS Standards) because there is no expense (i.e., no car payment). You can claim gas and vehicle maintenance, etc however - that is allowed but again, its at the trustee's discretion to approve the amount you claim.

Just to be clear, the trustee has the discretion to object to the amount claimed, but doesn't get the final word. If the trustee and the debtor can't come to agreement on the amount, it's the judge who makes the final decision of what will be allowed.

[whiscox]

Thanks for the info. Not exactly what I was hoping to hear. Based on what you have mentioned my attorney is wrong since he included the cost of ownership deduction on the means test and did not include maintenence costs in the schedule J (only gas), thus increasing my payment if the schedule J is used to determine my disposable income. I am assuming he is incorrect about the Schedule I & J and the plan not having to match as well since the trustee objected to it. Unfortunately I thought he knew what he was doing and now it looks like we are going to pay the price for that. Ironically I actually noticed this when we first filed and was told not to worry about it. Glad that I am paying him thousands of dollars to screw up something that was so obvious that even I noticed it, lol.

[Pandora]

Just to be clear, the trustee has the discretion to object to the amount claimed, but doesn't get the final word. If the trustee and the debtor can't come to agreement on the amount, it's the judge who makes the final decision of what will be allowed.

Thanks Lady for the clarification I thought in the BK code if you owned your vehicles outright you are not allowed to claim the IRS standard as an expense - only if you have an actual payment can you do so ? Did this change recently? I know you can claim transportation and maintenance costs, but the actual ownership cost cant be claimed if owned outright. We own 3 vehicles (2 outright) and were not able to claim IRS standards for ownership, only maintenance and gas costs.

[LadyInTheRed]

Thanks Lady for the clarification I thought in the BK code if you owned your vehicles outright you are not allowed to claim the IRS standard as an expense - only if you have an actual payment can you do so ? Did this change recently? I know you can claim transportation and maintenance costs, but the actual ownership cost cant be claimed if owned outright. We own 3 vehicles (2 outright) and were not able to claim IRS standards for ownership, only maintenance and gas costs.

My understanding is pretty much the same as yours, except that the BK code is apparently not real clear and I had the impression that this issue may be treated differently in different districts. I just googled it and found out it will become more clear soon. The ninth circuit court of appeal ruled that you have to be paying on a loan to claim the ownership costs. The debtor appealed the case and it was argued in the U.S. Supreme Court on October 4. No ruling yet. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files...-america-bank/

Keep your fingers crossed, whiscox!

[whiscox]

Lady In Red- Thanks for the information! I did a little more research and similar rulings have actually been upheld allowing the deductions in three other appeal districts, one of them being mine. I guess I may need to have a little more faith in my attorney, as it does appear like it is justified, at least for the time being. I really appreciate your help with this, and I am definitely keeping my fingers crossed!