top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

10 days after 341 - Insufficient Information Necessary to Make Presumption of Abuse

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • kphipps34
    replied
    Update. The lawyers office says I have to submit my parents social security monthly income and their expenses. I didn't get to talk to the lawyer but the question is how can the trustee ask for that when social security income is exempt income?

    Leave a comment:


  • kphipps34
    replied
    Thanks. Yes I have canceled checks for tithe. My only worry is my parents social security income. They truly don't contribute to the household at all.. All of their income goes for medical insurance, term life insurance, credit card payments that are only their accounts and then they are broke. I'm sure the trustee is questioning why I claim my sister but she is the full time caregiver for my father and drives him to dialysis three time a week - among other things and I give her money for her living expenses . I am gathering all this documentation to get to my lawyer in the morning. I know this will all be worth it in the end but......I have a complicated high income case. It took me year to find a lawyer that would even look at my circumstances beyond my income. So I'm praying this flys.

    Leave a comment:


  • justbroke
    replied
    I think that this means that the UST is questioning your expenses outright. I agree that giving them your (non-transcript) full tax return gives them dependent information, but it's okay to provide it again. It is the UST's job to really poke at over-the-median income cases. Since you are supporting adults, the UST is very interested in your household arrangement and the income of the other individuals.

    The best thing to do is not to fight he paperwork request, but fight any motion to dismiss. I guess this is all about "picking" your battles. You don't want to appear uncooperative when it comes to paperwork because you are required to work with the UST/Trustee. If they go for the 11 USC 707(b)(3) dismissal (also called the Totality of Circumstances dismissal), then you fight that.

    From the little that I know of your case... the requested information is not unreasonable. You can prove tithing simply by showing it itemized on your tax returns. If you don't itemize, then you'll need to show canceled checks or a receipt/document from the church/entity showing what you paid during the years 2009 and 2010. I'm guessing that you may have listed 10% for tithing on your Schedule J and the UST wants proof since 10% could be significant (if you are over the median).

    You stated that your parents are on SS (old age), but their income is in question... to the extent that they contribute to your expenses. It will be interesting how your attorney approaches this since I'm thinking that the UST is on the fence and considering a 707(b)(3) motion. If I were the UST, I would concentrate on 707(b)(3) and not the Presumption of Abuse under 707(b) at this point.

    Leave a comment:


  • kphipps34
    replied
    Ok heres what I got from my lawyers office today - Signed by the Secretary at the Law Office

    Please provide the following within 5 days:
    1. The identity of all dependents claimed on your 2009 and 2010 income tax returns
    2. The gross monthly income of each adult residing with you
    3. Proof of tithing since the date of filing Chapter 7
    4. Most recent paystub
    5. All orders and agreements with respect to child support and child custody
    6/ Most recent earning statement for all retirement and investment accounts
    7. Most recent bank statement for all accounts

    Now I provided my tax returns that list all dependents. A little background my mother and father live with me - I have a spouse and 3 children and I claim my sister as a dependent as I support her as she cares for my parents and drives my dad to dialysis three times a week.
    All income was reported as my parents only income in social security
    All other items were provided prior to filing.

    My child custody agreement states that I am responsible for taking my children to their father back and forth 6 times a year

    Any idea whats going on with this repeat requests for information????

    Leave a comment:


  • justbroke
    replied
    Originally posted by dman View Post
    They just bought themselves some more time.
    Alas, but they didn't buy more time. It is easy to fight these frivolous filings, if indeed this one is. One Judge put it like this (and don't quote me). There is nothing in the code that allows the UST to file a "statement" that they are "still looking into" the presumption of abuse. They must file a statement within the 10 days that there is a presumption of abuse or there is not one!

    11 USC 704 (b)(1)(A) the United States trustee (or the bankruptcy administrator, if any) shall review all materials filed by the debtor and, not later than 10 days after the date of the first meeting of creditors, file with the court a statement as to whether the debtor's case would be presumed to be an abuse under section 707(b);
    Of course, some Judges let this slide. If the UST had issues, the UST should have attended the 341 Meeting and made sure that the meeting was continued, not concluded. Hypertechnical procedural maneuvering!

    Leave a comment:


  • dman
    replied
    I'm no expert, but...maybe they're just really busy. It's a pretty good stall tactic. Got a lot of over-median filers they need to look at, only have a couple weeks or so to make a decision...so they do a generic "we need more info" filing. They just bought themselves some more time.

    Leave a comment:


  • justbroke
    replied
    Originally posted by IamOld View Post
    Thanks justbroke - well unsecured is about $70,000 BUT there is an ungodly sum in student loans which cannot of course be discharged, and about $8K in IRS. So the "regular" unsecured isn't "that much" I suppose. Do you think they'll look at student loans differently as they're not dischargable?
    No. I think that this is a "normal" review that the UST's office does for "over-the-median" debtors. Apparently, the UST doesn't have enough "documentation" to make an informed decision. As to what documentation they are looking for, only your attorney or the Office of the UST (OUST) can answer that.

    Leave a comment:


  • IamOld
    replied
    Originally posted by kphipps34 View Post
    over median income. All the paychecks where submitted. Gotta call my attorney and see what's up
    best of good luck!!!!!!!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • IamOld
    replied
    Originally posted by justbroke View Post
    Absolutely not! I was over the median and Chapter 7. But I was both a converted case (2 years in Chapter 13) and a non-consumer case. So that may have been part of my ability to slide pass the UST without even a blink!

    This really comes down to your local UST's office (Office of the United States Trustee). In most UST offices, the UST will take a closer look at any case where the debtor is over the median or the debtor is discharged at, near or over $100K in unsecured non-medical debt. It's their job to insure the integrity of the program and it's more efficient for them to set a bar where they review all cases. (The other under-the-median cases may be selected "randomly" for audit, but usually go under the radar!)
    Thanks justbroke - well unsecured is about $70,000 BUT there is an ungodly sum in student loans which cannot of course be discharged, and about $8K in IRS. So the "regular" unsecured isn't "that much" I suppose. Do you think they'll look at student loans differently as they're not dischargable?

    Leave a comment:


  • kphipps34
    replied
    Over median income. All the paychecks where submitted. Gotta call my attorney and see what's up

    Leave a comment:


  • justbroke
    replied
    Originally posted by IamOld View Post
    Justbroke - may I ask - does the US Trustee ALWAYS object when you file Ch 7 and are OVER the median? In my state there is a HUGE difference from my metro area and the rest of the state - HUGE - shouldn't even be the same state...does that make a difference? That they KNOW that in this area salaries are higher because cost of living is out of sight?
    Absolutely not! I was over the median and Chapter 7. But I was both a converted case (2 years in Chapter 13) and a non-consumer case. So that may have been part of my ability to slide pass the UST without even a blink!

    This really comes down to your local UST's office (Office of the United States Trustee). In most UST offices, the UST will take a closer look at any case where the debtor is over the median or the debtor is discharged at, near or over $100K in unsecured non-medical debt. It's their job to insure the integrity of the program and it's more efficient for them to set a bar where they review all cases. (The other under-the-median cases may be selected "randomly" for audit, but usually go under the radar!)

    Leave a comment:


  • IamOld
    replied
    Justbroke - may I ask - does the US Trustee ALWAYS object when you file Ch 7 and are OVER the median? In my state there is a HUGE difference from my metro area and the rest of the state - HUGE - shouldn't even be the same state...does that make a difference? That they KNOW that in this area salaries are higher because cost of living is out of sight?

    Leave a comment:


  • justbroke
    replied
    Missing paystubs would have caused the case to be dismissed, for cause, under 11 USC 521. That's the compliance section. (Notice how the initial post showed that the Debtor is "okay" under 521... "Docket Text Order that this case is not subject to dismissal under 521(i)(1)") I won't speculate here, but it appears that the United States Trustee is "interested" in your case. Was the "Presumption of Abuse" box checked on your Form B22A? Are you over/under median? There are just too many reasons why the UST would submit such a document.

    On the other hand, the UST is trying to cover his/her butt on the presumption issue, but the UST still has the all powerful Motion to Dismiss under 11 USC 707(b)... for totality of circumstances or bad faith.

    Remember that the Panel Trustee and the United States Trustee (UST) are two different people with different responsibilities. The Trustee is basically responsible for conducting the 341 Meeting and administering the assets in the case. The UST is the "true" gatekeeper to a discharge. The UST is responsible for making sure that only those eligible to and "deserving of" a Chapter 7 discharge, actually receives one. The UST is more about making sure all the "numbers" are right on your forms and that you don't have enough money to pay a dividend in a Chapter 13 to the unsecured creditors.

    I would contact my attorney immediately and find out what the Trustee wants. The Trustee still has until about 8/15/2011 (60 days from 341 Meeting) to file a Motion to Dismiss.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lalalink
    replied
    Another thought on what could be missing. Did you send in paystubs covering the 60 days prior to your file date? Perhaps the UST wants those as proof of what you put on your "non-missing means test form." In our district you are supposed to file them within 14 days of filing your petition; however, it has been known to be overlooked for up to 45 days. On day 46, if you did not submit them, the trustee can dismiss your case.

    Lala

    Leave a comment:


  • sunshinepa
    replied
    I would also guess that you are going to need to send more paperwork. It sounds like the trustee was ok with everything but then the UST got a look and didn't like what he saw. What does your attorney say? I would call and find out what they think.

    Keep us posted and good luck.

    Leave a comment:

bottom Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X