top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What about people who don't know anything about BK?

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

    #31
    dont you just love when someone withou kids gives you advice!
    Im not an attorney or a trustee. You cant trust me either though!

    [x] - Done with 341? Join the 60 Day Club! ___________[x] - Im Discharged! Whoo Hooo!
    [x] - Poll: Should I File Pro-Se ____________________[x] - New BK Law: Median Income, Means Testing and Presumptive Abuse
    [x] - Zombie Debt Collectors Dig Up Your Old Mistakes _-[x] - Bankruptcy Law Resource
    [x] - Need A Fast Answer? Available 24/7!--__________[x] - Dont Be A Hero On Your Budget - You Wont Get An Award!

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by newstart
      Are we talking about a person who filed pro se or with an attorney? because truly if they filed with an attorney it seems this subject would be touched on when asked about assets being bought and sold. When the papers are filled out on the statement of affairs that information would have to be listed and an explanation could be given to the attorney for his advice. i also agree with others on the forum that in order to make an informed decision on what one does not know they need to research and find out.
      Although an attny would "touch on" this particular issue, transfers of assets and properties, with any client during pre-filing discussions, I am learning there are lots of issues that attnys do not discuss with their clients.

      Attnys do not tell us in the half hour or hour long consult everything we need to know to make informed choices about how best to proceed. I think they sift thru the info we give them from an educated, uninvolved perspective, and immediately know possible legal alternatives. I think they also listen to us for ques as to what they think we want or do not want to do. Then they present us with choices based on what they think we told them we want.

      I saw this post yesterday and Staci's explanation made me realize something.

      http://www.bankruptcyforum.com/t6003...o-trustee.html

      "It has been the standard. In a ch. 13, unsecured creditors must get at least as much as they would have in a ch. 7. Mainly applies to when someone is trying to protect non-exempt assets."

      We have an unencombered, non-exemptable asset. Equity in a vehicle. Other attnys have said we are borderline 7/13 but do not explain themselves. One attny went thru adjusting and deducting expenses from net income. When he got done, he wanted to place us in a Ch 13 plan that would put us paying back less than 10% of what we owe. The total amount of payments happens to be about equal to the equity in our truck. I realize now what that attny did and why having read what Staci posted.

      That attny didn't run a Means Test to know that we're slightly below the median income for our area. If he had run the Means Test, would his approach/recommendation have been different?? We didn't know how much taxes we would owe when we had that Consult. How do the taxes factor into the whole situation now??
      Filed Ch 7 - 09/06
      Discharged - 12/2006
      Officially Declared No Asset - 03/2007
      Closed - 04/2007

      I am not an attorney. My comments are based on personal experience and research. Always consult an attorney in your area to address concerns related to your particular situation.

      Another good thing about being poor is that when you are seventy your children will not have declared you legally insane in order to gain control of your estate. - Woody Allen...

      Comment

      bottom Ad Widget

      Collapse
      Working...
      X