top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will this work-re: payments in 100% plan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    The others are correct, generally, the 341 meeting (except in a handful of districts) doesn't really address the plan. The 341 meeting for a chapter 13 is very similar to that of a chapter 7.

    You seem awfully devoted to the 100% plan, is that because you want to pay 100% or that your DMI is simply such that you will do so regardless?

    In any event, there is nothing inherently wrong with a "stepped-up" plan, but there must be a reason for it. (not that it would simply be "easier"). Your disposable income on the means test and, more importantly on Schedule I&J is what it is; if your year 1 payment does not equal that disposable income, the trustee WILL object. So, if your DMI is actually $1,200, but you are proposing $900, that will draw an objection, and you will lose; because you are not devoting all your DI to the plan. Beyond that, you need to justify the increase and that you can afford it. Generally, you want to avoid stepped up plan if possible. Stepped up plans are the "insiders" way of communicating to the trustee that the plan is likely to fail. You only do it because if you used the debtors DMI at time of filing, the debtor wouldn't be able to pay what "must" be paid in the plan (e.g. mortgage arrears, priority claims, etc.). So, if a debtor is adamant about saving their house, but only has $300 per month in DMI, but has $26,000 in mortgage arrears and other priority claims, THEN you do a stepped up plan to make the numbers work, on paper. Rarely do those plans every see discharge.

    So, keep it simple, work on your DMI, get it as low as possible and keep it the same number throughout the life of the plan.

    Comment


      #17
      My income and DMI is such that I will have to pay 100% even if I add a car payment. there are other reasons as well that it makes sense..I am filing individually and if I get in a plan less than 100% then she could end up on the hook for the remainder of the joint debt. Theres not a ton of that, but its not worth dragging her into the the bankruptcy.

      Im ok if I have a straightline payment..like I said though my debt is such that possibly a large chunk wont put in claims. So if we propose a straight line payment based on the total possible claims it will be way higher than necessary to pay everyone off within 60 months. Im great with shortening the time Im paying in..but if theres a way to work it Id rather ease the initial burden if we can justify the reasoning for that.

      Comment


        #18
        I think everyone is trying to say take it one day at a time, alot of stuff comes up, don't worry if your child care goes down they will know it. You want to have enough money to live on.

        Comment

        bottom Ad Widget

        Collapse
        Working...
        X