What do you think...

[chad9162]

Yes hugs for everyone and of course we are all friends.

[pookieny]

>This whole process has made me wonder if "we" the little guys, have been brainwashed by the rich into think that we have to pay our bills because its ethical or the right thing. I mean the rich Wall Street types don't. They use whatever loop hole they can not pay. To them its just business.[/QUOTE]

Yea, people want to make you feel bad because you filed BK and you must be a finacial disater/loser to do so. But everyone thinks business people like Walt Disney, Milton Hershey, Donald Trump etc. are great businessmen and successful but don't know they each have filed BK more than once. Even financial guru Dave Ramsely has filed.

[ela805]

I agree, group hug! I can see how my 'hmmm', was interpreted as sarcastic, actually. Maybe I should have clarifed by stating that my attorney seems very small town(just him and one employee). So when I saw that I was thinking, 'oh $hit, did I hire some rinky dink attorney??'

I guess a lot gets lost in translation when you're only reading someones words on a screen. Hell, a lot gets lost in translation even talking to someone face to face!

Friends?

[LuciluS]

Let's Just Agree wel All have our different personal opinions in OP's subject matter. None of can quote 'The Bankruptcy Law' and believe me I've tried for hours to find such.

As I say on my Medical Forums:

(((((((((((((((((GROUP HUG!))))))))))))))))

Luci

[chad9162]

@ela805....I apologize for my attitude but when you questioned the OP and ended with HMMMM it appeared to be scarcasim. From the HMMMM, I didn't get the whole you were questioning your attorney etc, but when I reread it it doesn't seem as hostile.

@Luci, Yes, I agree that all districts interpret the BK code differently. From what I've read income is based on the prior 6 months. The majority of districts count income when you receive your check, no distinction between commission, self employment, or regular job income. Also, Guru/Mods are rated by how many times they post. So take the information for what it is. I read many of your post and it appears you very knowledgeable on this subject.

@Amy....No, really I wasn't picking on you!!! I agree with you that on the surface it may appear unethical, but when you step back and look at what Corporate America is doing its not.

The code is the code. Its the standard. Corporate America follows the code to w/o considering Ethics or Morals. So why are "we" held to a higher standard?

The point I'm trying to make is that we've all been told that bankruptcy is so bad and morally wrong. How many post have you read where people are upset or feel bad for filing and not paying their debts. Does Corporate America feel bad when they don't pay their debts?

The 2005 Bankruptcy Reform Act created a Means Test for consumers making BK more restrictive because we "consumers" were taking advantage of bankruptcy and costing taxpayers millions. But the Reform Act did nothing to restrict businesses or Corporate America. There's no means test for businesses. How many times has Donald Trump been in Bankruptcy yet he's still building casinos. Who's the one "really" taking advantage and costing taxpayers millions.

Most of us here didn't buy luxury items or take extravagant vacations. We were just trying to survive and got sucked into the credit/debt cycle. Someone said, "Bankruptcy is the "little guys" government bailout." From what I've seen so far in this economic turmoil I agree with that statement. Obama is trying but all I got was $25 in my paycheck yet Corporate America got billions. Ironic that a Republican started the giving tree when they are supposed to believe in "free market."

Sorry, got off topic but needed to vent.

[Amy26]

I had written up a big long rebuttle to what Chad said but its not really worth it. And yes, you were picking on me.

I'll just say I mentioned nothing of anyone else's circumstances aside from the comparison that Luci asked me personally about and in that particular comparison, that was my opinion.

Everyone's case is individual and will go vastly different than someone else's. Based on statements made by the OP in this thread, opinions have been formed. Perhaps they are unwarrented but people will think what they want based on what they read.

I am also unfamiliar with commison based pay, but from what was stated in the thread, yes to me it sounded unethical to have a steady position that you generally make a good deal of money from but just happen to have only made so much in the current year and then oh yea btw I'm getting 14k in a month (and he stated he would be getting several more large ones). So, to me and some other people it sounded like a potential to pay debt. Not to mention he said things regarding taking the money (to use it up) and buying engagement rings and things. Maybe unethical is not the right word... but to me just doesn't seem right. I'm sure there is way more than meets the eye to this person than a few posts in a thread, but we are strictly going on what was said regarding this person in this thread. I am not discussing other people who purposely do not take a job or cut their hours on purpose.

[LuciluS]

I am not trying to pick on Amy but her points seems to be a consensus on the thread. As Lucilus pointed out I don't see anything unethical. The OP is following the BK code. The code states that income in based on the prior 6 months and that the filing date establishes the BK estate.

In fact, if you win the lottery after the filing date, it wouldn't matter. Its not part of the BK estate. It could be argued that his future checks were known ahead of time and could theoretically be included in the BK estate, sort of like a settlement check. But that's something he needs to figure out with his attorney.

I just don't understand why everyone is being judgmental when there are people on this forum who aren't working or refuse to get a job so they can file Chapter 7. Is that ethical!? People on this forum have cut back on work hours, pass up on overtime or wait until there income averages out again to qualify for Chap 7. Again, Is that ethical?



This statement is a bit of a contradiction. On one hand its okay Luci uses the law to her advantage but on the other hand the OP can't. To me its the same.

Again what's the difference between people who are not working, cutting hours, averaging income etc, aren't they circumventing the system? If I quit my job for 6 months and make zero income, I'd qualify for Chapter 7. I "knowingly" know that I will get a job after discharge and can make $50K the next 6 months. So technically, I'm like the OP, I'd be getting a $50K check once I discharge. Its semantics but the same concept.

Since my name was mentioned, yes, Chad, I agree. There are some who Plan their BK, retain Atty. and others who decide & file all in the same month.

It tooks me weeks to list our Assets & a month to list our CC debt, as our BK Attorney's packet required date CC opened, any charges, date of $600 & all Balance Transfers/date and purpose. I had paid off around 5 CCs with BTs' from other CC promotional offers. It was a nightmare.

OP said his Attorney was aware of the commission check and the Moderators/Gurus state ' Make sure your Attorney knows. As I was not familiar with Commission Pay Only, I decided to back out of the conversation.

I hope the OP posts after his 341 hearing. Might be some of us will learn 'something'. All BK cases are different in some fashion or form. Also Districts/States are not interpreting the BK Codes the same.

Luci

[ela805]

What's your point??? I got my 341 on the spot to. My attorney file electronically.

Don't come on here jumping on me. I was just surprised that it worked that way in some states and it made me question MY attorney's process, that's all. And actually I AGREE that it's all business and with your statement about AIG and the others methods vs the little man's.

So I would appreciate it if you would take your attitude toward nearly every poster on this thread and quietly crawl down from whatever pedistal you put yourself on.

[chad9162]

The worst part will be if he comes back here in like 3 months and says "haha it all worked".

I am not trying to pick on Amy but her points seems to be a consensus on the thread. As Lucilus pointed out I don't see anything unethical. The OP is following the BK code. The code states that income in based on the prior 6 months and that the filing date establishes the BK estate.

In fact, if you win the lottery after the filing date, it wouldn't matter. Its not part of the BK estate. It could be argued that his future checks were known ahead of time and could theoretically be included in the BK estate, sort of like a settlement check. But that's something he needs to figure out with his attorney.

I just don't understand why everyone is being judgmental when there are people on this forum who aren't working or refuse to get a job so they can file Chapter 7. Is that ethical!? People on this forum have cut back on work hours, pass up on overtime or wait until there income averages out again to qualify for Chap 7. Again, Is that ethical?

No, I don't consider your situation unethical either... you are basing your decision on laws. You are waiting the proper time for something you know exists and filing accordingly.

This person knowingly realizes he will get a 14k check in the very near future and wants to file BEFORE he gets that check to circumvent the system so he doesn't have to include that as income. THAT is unethical... to me. Legal? I guess so... but just doesn't seem right.

This statement is a bit of a contradiction. On one hand its okay Luci uses the law to her advantage but on the other hand the OP can't. To me its the same.

Again what's the difference between people who are not working, cutting hours, averaging income etc, aren't they circumventing the system? If I quit my job for 6 months and make zero income, I'd qualify for Chapter 7. I "knowingly" know that I will get a job after discharge and can make $50K the next 6 months. So technically, I'm like the OP, I'd be getting a $50K check once I discharge. Its semantics but the same concept.

[chad9162]

Just poking my head into this thread to say~Wow, you filed on 6/11 they gave you the 341 date on the spot? I got mine in the mail a couple of weeks later. Hmmmm....

What's your point??? I got my 341 on the spot to. My attorney file electronically.

[chad9162]

You are correct poo... I am in the same boat he is. My median for the last 6 months is way under but if I filed months from now I would be over the median. My qualm with it is more of an ethical one. If I was about to get a large check like that, I personally couldn't ethically file ... but that's just me.

I don't think ethics has anything to do with it. It's all business. I mean was it ethical for AIG to spend over $400,000 (for top executives) to spend a weekend at the Ritz Carlton in Half Moon Bay after receiving billions in taxpayer bailouts? Is it ethical that FORD, Chrysler, GMC, and other Wall Street Companies file bankruptcy and screw their employees and creditors?

This whole process has made me wonder if "we" the little guys, have been brainwashed by the rich into think that we have to pay our bills because its ethical or the right thing. I mean the rich Wall Street types don't. They use whatever loop hole they can not pay. To them its just business.

[TeacherMomma]

I got my 341 date/time the day I filed.
And I also got a letter ,as I have posted, from the UST for ALL earnings documents/paychecks/proof of other sources of income from the 6 months back AND up to the date of the 341 (and last years taxes).....no problem for me, but the OP would be in a hard spot if asked to do the same.
We are also over median.

[jadams]

Well, if you work on commission -- is your income earned when you make the sale, or when you receive the check?

I recall reading about about when income is considered earned in regards to real estate commissions -- when the property is put under contract (and thus the commission amount fixed and usually the realtor's work is done), or when everything finally closes and the check is actually cut? Depending on the district, it went both ways.

If the OP is in an area that considers it earned when the work is done, he may have bigger problems than "did your circumstances change".

[SuzieBK]

If that is his pay and it's not unusual for him to be paid this way, then technically nothing changed.

That's my point. I work for myself and will get checks ranging from $25 to $3K at various points during the year. If I got a $3K check right before the 341, I don't see that as a change in my circumstances. However, if my husband, who is a W2 employee were to get a raise/promotion before our 341, then, yes, that would be a change in our circumstances. I think that there is a difference for people working commission or as consultants.

[pookieny]

If that is his pay and it's not unusual for him to be paid this way, then technically nothing changed.