Just Filed & Father Died

[StartingOver08]

So there is a silver lining to your troubles! As least some of the student loan debt will be reduced. Good luck to you and your wife.

[pigpen75]

Congratulations on making the right decision! I bet you can rest easy now that it is all out in the open. I don't see how the attorney can fight it because the Trustee's look for inheritances every day and the BK law is very specific on who gets the money!

I am sorry that your father has passed and you had to go through these terrible ordeals at the very same time. But it sounds like things are beginning to look up for you.

Thanks and things are getting even a little better. Mine and my wifes student loan banks filed proof of claims for the remaining $20k so a chunk of that inheritance will go to our stu loans.

[StartingOver08]

Congratulations on making the right decision! I bet you can rest easy now that it is all out in the open. I don't see how the attorney can fight it because the Trustee's look for inheritances every day and the BK law is very specific on who gets the money!

I am sorry that your father has passed and you had to go through these terrible ordeals at the very same time. But it sounds like things are beginning to look up for you.

[pigpen75]

***UPDATE***

The Trustee made a deal and said he will allow $6k to be exempt. My lawyer said we can still fight for the whole thing but we may end up with nothing, especially since the insurance policy is civilian and not miliatary. So i think I made out pretty good.

[pigpen75]

It's "fraudulent transfer of assets". Here you go:

"In bankruptcy, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. �548 (section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code), a fraudulent transfer is any transfer of any asset--or any interest in any asset (such as part ownership in a home)-- made within two (2) years prior to filing the bankruptcy case and in which either of the following are true: A. The transfer was made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any entity to which the debtor was or later became indebted to; OR B. the debtor received less than reasonably equivalent value for the exchange AND was insolvent on the date the transfer was made (or became insolvent as a result of the transfer). There are actual several other bases for the transfer to be considered fraudulent, but these are the most common. "

http://www.bklaw.com/asset-transfers.html

If pigpen follows her lawyer's advice, she would be refiling after transferring an asset with the intent to hinder repayment to creditors. The case trustee in our district would get the UST involved and this would end one of two ways... at best, the trustee would get the money back from the brother and not go after pigpen for fraud; or the case would be dismissed with prejudice under 707(a), motion for fraud.

Without recounting the nightmare that was our bankruptcy case, there are two things I learned having to defend our petition to the U.S. Trustee: (1) lawyers will give advice based on probability, e.g., likelihood of being "caught" and (2) the truth eventually floats to the surface (either to your benefit or to your detriment). If you explain the circumstances to the case trustee and believe in karma, maybe the trustee will work out something with you or that money will make its way back to you in the future. Money doesn't buy peace of mind...

Yea, I need some peace of mind. It bothers me that I will be paying for most of my debts with the inheritance and still have a scarlet letter on my credit report for 10 years. However, my nerves are shot at thinking that I may get caught and go to jail, its just not worth it.

[Help!]

That's not fraud. Why can't the brother get the money? There's no harm in that.

It's "fraudulent transfer of assets". Here you go:

"In bankruptcy, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. �548 (section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code), a fraudulent transfer is any transfer of any asset--or any interest in any asset (such as part ownership in a home)-- made within two (2) years prior to filing the bankruptcy case and in which either of the following are true: A. The transfer was made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any entity to which the debtor was or later became indebted to; OR B. the debtor received less than reasonably equivalent value for the exchange AND was insolvent on the date the transfer was made (or became insolvent as a result of the transfer). There are actual several other bases for the transfer to be considered fraudulent, but these are the most common. "

http://www.bklaw.com/asset-transfers.html

If pigpen follows her lawyer's advice, she would be refiling after transferring an asset with the intent to hinder repayment to creditors. The case trustee in our district would get the UST involved and this would end one of two ways... at best, the trustee would get the money back from the brother and not go after pigpen for fraud; or the case would be dismissed with prejudice under 707(a), motion for fraud.

Without recounting the nightmare that was our bankruptcy case, there are two things I learned having to defend our petition to the U.S. Trustee: (1) lawyers will give advice based on probability, e.g., likelihood of being "caught" and (2) the truth eventually floats to the surface (either to your benefit or to your detriment). If you explain the circumstances to the case trustee and believe in karma, maybe the trustee will work out something with you or that money will make its way back to you in the future. Money doesn't buy peace of mind...

[debtmonster]

That's called Fraud
good luck

That's not fraud. Why can't the brother get the money? There's no harm in that.

[pigpen75]

I think after reading your guys' post that I may tell my lawyer im going to the 341 meeting and tell the trustee about he inheritance. I don't want to have to be nervous about paying a huge fine or going to jail.

[Help!]

****UPDATE****
I just got done talking to my lawyer. The conversation was a little interesting, to say the least.
He said to skip out on the 341 meeting. The trustee should reschedule another one for about a month or so later. The lawyer or one of his reps will go to the second one and say they haven't heard from me. He then told me the BK should be dismissed within 30 days or so. Once and if we get it dismissed, let both automobiles get repossesed, by a couple more dependable ones with cash, so (i'm no longer upside down). Take the rest of the $ and put it in to my morgage. We then will file again in a few months. He says the second time we will get a new trustee and everything should be fine. I asked him what the worst that could happen, and he said I would lose the inheritance, So I guess I got nothing to lose? What do you guys think?

Well, you asked so here's what I think. You filed for BK, got an inheritance and are now trying to hide it from the trustee so you can keep it (in one form or another) while later discharging all of your debt. I think your attorney's willingness to send a representative to lie to the trustee is sickening and that attorneys like this are the reason the presumption of abuse exists. You could be headed for a far worse outcome than losing an inheritance and in my opinion you are playing with fire. What your attorney is suggesting goes beyond timing a bankruptcy... this is dishonest and it's gaming the system. If you decide to go along with this, good luck to you. You'll need it.

[jessegirl]

Ya know, your lawyer would like the idea of you getting it dismissed and then refiling. Cause he has to do nothing and is already paid and then he will get paid again.

[Genenco]

I would have no problems at all giving up all of my inheritance to all the crditors and handeling my "obligations." However, those bastards will refuse to take the BK off my credit for 10 years and that is BS!

I can agree, that once the damage is "Done" it can't be "Undone" and so, yes that note in your credit file, will stay there. But, let not the anger of the situation overcome good sense.

It really sounds like your lawyer is telling you to commit fraud..No, that's not what you'd ever want to do. From what I gather (and several have said so) your lawyer is playing VERY loose with the rules in regards to bk law.

I'd be VERY leery in dealing with him. In fact, I'd really head to another lawyer, spread it out for them and let them see what can, could and should be done "Legally".

You can always fire your lawyer, and yes, you'd have to eat the money, but you'd have a better idea of who to NOT reccommend should anyone ask you if you knew a good bk lawyer.

And my condolences to you for the loss of your Father.

[pigpen75]

I would have no problems at all giving up all of my inheritance to all the crditors and handeling my "obligations." However, those bastards will refuse to take the BK off my credit for 10 years and that is BS!

[AngelinaCatHub]

Pigpen - I do not think that the trustee is going to think that you had your case dismissed because of grief, when they find out that you got an inheritance. Believe me, I totally understand you wanting to keep the money that your father intended you to have. BUT, the trustee is not going to think of grief they are going to know that you got an inhertance and did not continue with the BK cause of the money. Comon, they see this kind of stuff. They are not stupid and they will know why you dropped the other BK. I think that you are probably causing a problem for yourself but its your business and you feel what you are doing is right. IMO - I would try to exempt whatever you can and go thru with the BK. You have already paid the attorney and then you are going to have to pay him again. What are you gaining by keeping the money? When in turn it is going to cost you again for attorney fees and POSSIBLY the CC companies are going to filing suit once the stay is lifted. Becareful....

[pigpen75]

Yea, maybe the whole grief thing probably won't be a good idea. I'll just listen and take the advice from my lawyer. He seems pretty confident, but I do think I'll have to wait 180 to refile after this gets dismissed?

[jessegirl]

Pigpen - I do not think that the trustee is going to think that you had your case dismissed because of grief, when they find out that you got an inheritance. Believe me, I totally understand you wanting to keep the money that your father intended you to have. BUT, the trustee is not going to think of grief they are going to know that you got an inhertance and did not continue with the BK cause of the money. Comon, they see this kind of stuff. They are not stupid and they will know why you dropped the other BK. I think that you are probably causing a problem for yourself but its your business and you feel what you are doing is right. IMO - I would try to exempt whatever you can and go thru with the BK. You have already paid the attorney and then you are going to have to pay him again. What are you gaining by keeping the money? When in turn it is going to cost you again for attorney fees and POSSIBLY the CC companies are going to filing suit once the stay is lifted. Becareful....