I have a question?

[gem561]

Has anyone had anything wierd happen after the 341 and the trustee posts "NO DISTRIBUTION"? By weird, i mean. A creditor object, or UST wanting to be involved, or 341 continuation requested and such forth. I was happy to see his conclusion of no distribution filed....but now my "Dont count your chickens before they hatch" has set in! This is going to be a LONG 60 days!

[Help!]

Are you sure you want an answer to this one? Yes, the case trustee posted the "no distribution" statement in our case, but our 341 hearing was continued and the UST filed a motion to dismiss for abuse. If this causes you to worry, it should make you feel better that we eventually were discharged (but not without a lot of hard work and parting with assets). You're wise to save the celebration for discharge, but unless you see something on PACER you should assume you're moving right along through the process.

[momof3b1g]

Are you sure you want an answer to this one? Yes, the case trustee posted the "no distribution" statement in our case, but our 341 hearing was continued and the UST filed a motion to dismiss for abuse. If this causes you to worry, it should make you feel better that we eventually were discharged (but not without a lot of hard work and parting with assets). You're wise to save the celebration for discharge, but unless you see something on PACER you should assume you're moving right along through the process.

If you don't mind. I'm curious why you ended up giving up assests. After they said their was nothing to give away? How did they come to be?

[gem561]

Yes. I am curious as well? What was the UST grounds for suspecting abuse? And how long ago was this? Thank you for your input.

[Help!]

In our case, the U.S. Trustee disagreed with our attorney on what should be included as income on the means test. Abuse, by the way, is not what the name implies. If a series of calculations on the means test (based on income) results in a number that is above a certain threshold, the "presumption of abuse" arises. The term "abuse" implies that a debtor is trying to cheat or "abuse" the system, but it usually means the debtor's income is too high for Ch. 7. When this happens, the UST files a motion to dismiss for abuse under 707(b).

Anyway, with those disputed amounts added in, we were above that threshold.

Our income in the six months prior to filing was much higher than our current income. Our current net income left very little to fund a Ch. 13 plan and we explained to the trustee and UST that liquidation of assets in a Ch. 7 would result in greater repayment to creditors than a Ch. 13 plan. They agreed and allowed our case to continue to discharge provided we surrendered the agreed upon assets. It was an unusual case, to say the least.