We've gotten all the "analysis" that the UST's office did of our numbers. Well, for some reason they are using the originally filed B22 not the corrected one- and some of the numbers are wrong. Not sure why the corrected one wasn't referred to- as far as I knew the attorney's office filed it within a day of our 341.
Some of the biggest issues are she's saying we're over withholding for taxes by $391 a month. Well, I'm sorry but last year we had a $3900 tax bill upon filing and this year we are losing 1 dependent child based on his yearly wages. Her math only works with fairy dust and maybe 3 clicks of my ruby red heels. I am not reducing my withholdings to BELOW what they were last year when I'll have more taxable income this year and ended up owing last year.
Also she's arguing that we put in for more than the IRS standard for our housing. The non-mortgage allowance is $1060 for 5 or more people. We are a family of 8, our rent was $1725 and was considerably low for our area. Not sure if it's a formality because the paralegal but the entire rent expense on line 20B and not the standard plus the overage on line 21, but I will gladly challenge the UST to find me a rent for that amount in a non-gang run neighborhood. I live one street over from a trailer park, so I'm surely not living in a gated community or anything.
Lastly, she's reduced our ownership expense on the one vehicle we have. It's my mom's car, she couldnt afford the payment. So we send her the $300 a month, and we use the car. If we don't pay the $300 a month, we just turn the relationship with my mom sour...my mom's STILL going to pay the car. Yet, on the "facts" portion of the motion the UST lists that we have $32K in secured debt, tied to the Expedition we are giving up. So which is it- do we have $32K in secured debt tied to the car we are surrendering, or do we also have the debt on my mom's car so therefor we can't claim any ownership expense? Either or, but not both. And yes it matters because she includes the expense of my mom's car in her estimated chapter 13 payment AND I guess if the car is over 6 years old/has more than 75K miles with no lease on it we can get an additional $200/month operation expense. Boy, sure could use that, and it's accurate, since this car is an 03 and has 116K on it and needs $2200 in repairs right now.
Which brings me to my last question for the attorney. Why not just recommend converstion? Why dismiss? Is it because she knows the $2800 estimated 13 payment is absurd and would never fly? If so, right there is a gigantic blackhole for people to fall into thanks to the Bankruptcy legislation Congress put into place for us.
Some of the biggest issues are she's saying we're over withholding for taxes by $391 a month. Well, I'm sorry but last year we had a $3900 tax bill upon filing and this year we are losing 1 dependent child based on his yearly wages. Her math only works with fairy dust and maybe 3 clicks of my ruby red heels. I am not reducing my withholdings to BELOW what they were last year when I'll have more taxable income this year and ended up owing last year.
Also she's arguing that we put in for more than the IRS standard for our housing. The non-mortgage allowance is $1060 for 5 or more people. We are a family of 8, our rent was $1725 and was considerably low for our area. Not sure if it's a formality because the paralegal but the entire rent expense on line 20B and not the standard plus the overage on line 21, but I will gladly challenge the UST to find me a rent for that amount in a non-gang run neighborhood. I live one street over from a trailer park, so I'm surely not living in a gated community or anything.
Lastly, she's reduced our ownership expense on the one vehicle we have. It's my mom's car, she couldnt afford the payment. So we send her the $300 a month, and we use the car. If we don't pay the $300 a month, we just turn the relationship with my mom sour...my mom's STILL going to pay the car. Yet, on the "facts" portion of the motion the UST lists that we have $32K in secured debt, tied to the Expedition we are giving up. So which is it- do we have $32K in secured debt tied to the car we are surrendering, or do we also have the debt on my mom's car so therefor we can't claim any ownership expense? Either or, but not both. And yes it matters because she includes the expense of my mom's car in her estimated chapter 13 payment AND I guess if the car is over 6 years old/has more than 75K miles with no lease on it we can get an additional $200/month operation expense. Boy, sure could use that, and it's accurate, since this car is an 03 and has 116K on it and needs $2200 in repairs right now.
Which brings me to my last question for the attorney. Why not just recommend converstion? Why dismiss? Is it because she knows the $2800 estimated 13 payment is absurd and would never fly? If so, right there is a gigantic blackhole for people to fall into thanks to the Bankruptcy legislation Congress put into place for us.
Comment