Means Test Question

[SinkingFast]

http://www.bankruptcybooks.com/peer_...l#Anchorissues

The attny we met with Monday knows the Trustees very well. We have 2 for our Court here. When we told the attny we'd met with the one Trustee's daughter so we couldn't use him, the attny said he wished we'd met with the Lady Trustee instead. He said the older gentleman was easy to get along with. He'd look over things, if it all looked good and had basis, he would say, "OK" and that would be it. The Lady Trustee sees something new and she will research it to death before she decides.

Based on the comments above, maybe that attny kept emphasizing I and J because he knows that's what the Court is gonna look for here. At least until the Higher Courts rule what the standard is or is not gonna be.

[FoolAndHisMoney]

The attny we saw Monday said contributions to Hubby's 401K would be an allowable expense. I hear so many different things from attnys I don't know what to believe at this point.

I think it's 401k loan paybacks the lawyer meant and the 401k can't be touched since it's exempt.

LostOne0069 is correct. If contribution expenses were allowed then all everyone has to do is maximize their contributions and problem solved.

[SinkingFast]

I've gathered by now that he was wrong. Didn't matter in our case as we weren't counting an expense there anyway. But for other people that see that attny, it might be an issue.

He also said we could deduct son's college tuition we've paid, but it clearly says education expenses for dependents under age 18.

How many other "wrong" things did he tell us?? I wonder??

[LostOne0069]

All this makes me VERY glad I found this site. When we start making new appointments with attorneys (we're holding off on filing until March-April) I'm going to put together EVERYTHING that I can find that they should need, tax info, income, inventory, expenses, IRS info, etc. etc. Plus I'm going to bring in full copies of the bankruptcy code, old and new... and I'm going to sit there and ask about these things until I am satisfied with the answers... meaning if they tell me that the median income test doesn't mean anything... I'm going to show them 707(b)(7) and ask them to explain it to me and why it doesn't apply. If I can't get an attorney to answer these questions to my satisfaction.... I'm going to keep looking. Somewhere out there is an attorney who will work for ME and not the trustee.

[SinkingFast]

I think, in our case, that attny kept referring back to I and J because he knows it's gonna be an issue here with Trustees.

Like the source I cited before, the law says one thing, but that attny already knows the Trustees are gonna apply it another way.

One attny we've chatted with has suggested we contract an attny in the old, home state on a consultant basis. The attny here can access our exemptions on-line. Knowing dollar amounts is not a problem. The attny here said, "The way the law is written and how it's applied in Courts there are not always one and the same thing." And that can even vary from Court to Court in the same state.

[LostOne0069]

That is EXACTLY what I mean about finding an attorney who will work for ME rather than the trustee.

I mean, if the law is written one way and applied another... this is a problem and any lawyer who is actually trying to earn his pay should object to that and make the court follow the law. I mean, it should be an open and shut case if the law is on your side. The court can't just say, "we don't agree with the law and so we're going to do it the way we want to" They have to follow the law. If an attorney objects to how it is being applied, the court has to explain WHY the attorneys objection is wrong. I used to work for a law firm (NOT as an attorney... I'm a computer nerd) and I heard attorneys talk about this... that is what an attorney is for. to argue the LAW as it applied to their client. Meaning that they are supposed to point out to the court how the law supports YOUR position.

Any attorney who says, "well, the law is written that way, but the trustee won't follow it so we shouldn't try" will NOT get my business.

[SinkingFast]

The attny we saw Monday spoke to that as well.

He can push a case based on the law as written and loose.

He can push a case based on his interpretation of the law and loose.

Until there are established precedents under the New Law, he's gonna have to play "the game" by the rules of the Judges and Trustees. If the Trustees here say I and J are the basis for establishing a 7 or a "good faith" payment in 13, and the Judges side with the Trustee, then that's how it will be, until the US Court firmly rules otherwise.

That's not working for the Court or the Trustee, IMHO. That's informing the client of what can and cannot be accomplished in their particular case at this particular time.

[alh]

I wonder how many cases under the new law they have actually seen that happen and not just assumed it was going to happen.

Of course you can push something and lose. But you can also win. I don't want a lawyer whose thought process is that you are probably right but we may actually have to go to court to find out so we better not do that. Why is it I am paying him again. I can save the fee and and screw it up myself.

In my case it is a huge matter for myself and my family. The one lawyer I spoke to would have us forced to live on literally a poverty level budget for 5 years instead of a having a discharge and being able to get out of this financial hell that unemployment brought on.

I would think (hope) somewhere there is a lawyer that would get a little excited about the chance to be involve in a case that might set a precident) You would think it would be a nice item on your resume.

But who knows

[alh]

The attny we saw Monday spoke to that as well.

Until there are established precedents under the New Law, he's gonna have to play "the game" by the rules of the Judges and Trustees. If the Trustees here say I and J are the basis for establishing a 7 or a "good faith" payment in 13, and the Judges side with the Trustee, then that's how it will be, until the US Court firmly rules otherwise.

If every attorney did that, how would a case be brought before the US courts to decide.

[SinkingFast]

He was more than happy to take our case and push it to the hilt. He said that's what makes law and he was excited by the prospect. He also wanted us to be sure that we knew we may not win. Where loosing would land us. What the consequences were.

Going with the flow could be easier and less costly than bucking the current establishment. For US not him.

[alh]

If he/she is is doing that then they are doing their job. (IMHO) To many attorneys are taking the easy way however, even when it seems that it may not be in the best interest of their clients. Sounds like you may have found a decent attorney.

[sportster]

I've been reading cases filed by the guy we're going to see tomorrow. One of the many cases he filed in October, here's the expenses for a single man with good income, in his 30's:

Home maintenance $40.00 (on a rent)
Food $500.00
Clothing $200
Laundry $100
Medical $40
Transportation $300
Recreation/clubs $300
Charity $100
Electric/heat $200
Rent $800
Telephone $80
Cable $60

On his income schedule, they deducted pension as well.

His J schedule shows a positive 200.00 each month, and he was granted a discharge with no questions asked.

The new law does not (as far as I know) address the I/J schedules. Trustees should handle everything like they did before the law changed, with the exception being the means test. We shall see.

[eddie]

Income changes during Chapter 7 process

Hi,

I'm new to all of this. Does anyone know what happens when your income changes (new job finally) prior to the end of the 341 meeting?

Thanks,
Eddie

[LostOne0069]

So, How'd it go Friday?

I've been reading cases filed by the guy we're going to see tomorrow. One of the many cases he filed in October, here's the expenses for a single man with good income, in his 30's:

Home maintenance $40.00 (on a rent)
Food $500.00
Clothing $200
Laundry $100
Medical $40
Transportation $300
Recreation/clubs $300
Charity $100
Electric/heat $200
Rent $800
Telephone $80
Cable $60

On his income schedule, they deducted pension as well.

His J schedule shows a positive 200.00 each month, and he was granted a discharge with no questions asked.

The new law does not (as far as I know) address the I/J schedules. Trustees should handle everything like they did before the law changed, with the exception being the means test. We shall see.

[sportster]

It went pretty well. Since we are over the median, he said he would have to run the figures throught the entire means test. He has not had a client yet over the median since the new law. He will get back in touch with us this week to discuss our options. We gave him the pay stubs, and list of creditors. He did not lean more towards one Chapter than the other. We did give him $250.00, which is what he asked for as a down payment, and he explained that if we chose to use someone else, that money will be considered payment for his time post-consultation, the wife and I agreed that was fair. We are going to stick with him anyway. Many of the BK attorneys in our area have stoped practicing since BAPCPA. Our lawyer did feel that BAPCPA more correctly stands for "Bankruptcy Access Prevention/Creditor Protection Act". He also feels the creditors will really not benefit from it the way they thought they would.