Debtor Math

By Helen M. Morris, Chapter 13 Trustee, Northern and Southern Districts of West Virginia

debtormathDebtor math baffles me.   I work base 10 daily; I am even competent in base 6 and can do binary.  But I just can’t get the hang of debtor math.

For example, in a motion filed by an experienced debtor attorney:

“The debtors request permission to settle with the insurance carrier for $7,974 and to use $8,995 of the proceeds to purchase a replacement vehicle.” (No, the figures weren’t transposed.  The insurance settlement was $7,974.00.)

In an order drafted by the same attorney with respect to the treatment of a Special Class unsecured claim:

“[Creditor’s] claim will be kept at $188.71 times 28 months or $4,975.88.”  Of course, $188.71 times 28 is $5,283.88.   Every staffer who handled that order came to me with a question—is the claim to be paid at $188.71 for 28 months or a total of $4,975.88?  I raised the issue at confirmation and the answer from the Court was that the creditor was to be paid $4,975.88 at the rate of $188.71 for as many months as necessary.

That same attorney filed a motion to modify a confirmed plan (He always calls it amending the plan, but that’s another story.) in which he wanted to extend the plan from 36 months to 60 months and add the mortgage to be paid through the trustee.  I had no problem with the concept, but with his math.  (DUH!)  I filed a response that stated that the modified plan payments needed to be $1,290.00 for the remaining 39 months if the plan were extended.   At the hearing, he persuaded the Judge to extend the plan to 47 months and set the plan payments at $1,070.00 for the remaining period.  The plan is now short the sum of $8,013.02.  Trustee’s motion for reconsideration has been filed.

One expects math problems with pro se debtors, and one of my classic cases was filed by an infrequent Chapter 13 filer–now a debtor himself, pro se, of course.  (I guess the good news/bad news  for his clients is that he isn’t doing  a better job with his own case than he does on theirs.)

Monthly disposable income is $126.81.  Plan payments are $361.10 per month for 60 months.  Two mortgages are to be paid through the plan.  One mortgage has monthly payments of $838.15 per month and a pre-petition arrearage of $6,091.81.   The second mortgage has monthly payments of $457.38 per month.

It’s only short about $74,000.00—and that’s just to pay administrative and secured claims.  There are $86,524.00 in unsecured claims.

Are there coupons I’m supposed to be using to stretch the debtor dollar?

Of course, the creditors aren’t always on top of the calculator either.  In a recent case, the system showed that there was a balance on the pre-petition arrearage unpaid as well as a post-petition arrearage.  (We are a conduit jurisdiction now, but weren’t at the time the case was filed.  The ongoing mortgage payments were added post-confirmation in resolution of a motion for stay relief.)  Two letters to the debtors and their counsel providing documentation (proof of claim filed by the creditor and a copy of order setting the post-petition arrearage as well as payment history to the affected creditor on the pre-petition, post-petition and on-going payments through my office) brought a fax to me from the creditor which simply stated that the debtors are current on the mortgage.

I responded to the creditor with a letter pointing out that I showed there were balances due on the arrearage claims and I could not use a fax to “correct” my numbers.  The creditor’s attorney called my office and told the staffer who answered the phone that other trustees file a Notice of Final Cure and the creditor will respond to that.  He didn’t understand why I couldn’t do that.  Never mind that I had previously talked to the attorney and explained that I was still showing balances due—thus, I couldn’t file a pleading with the Court stating that the arrearages were cured.  It took two more phone calls before the creditor finally filed something with the Court.

The same creditor, however, in a case in which I was showing the debtor current and the default cured, filed a response that the debtor wasn’t current and indicated an amount due which didn’t correspond with anything of record.  I filed a Reply.  Subsequently, my office received a phone call from a bank employee saying that my reply was correct and they weren’t going to attend the hearing.

My office manager is growing concerned.  She has her mortgage with that bank.

______________________

2013-01-26 16.11.10-1Helen M. Morris has been the Chapter 13 trustee for the Northern and Southern Districts of West Virginia since October 1, 1996. Prior to her appointment, she was in private practice in Huntington, WV, where she served as a Chapter 7 panel trustee in addition to representing both debtors and creditors in bankruptcy matters; but not in the same case. She has a Bachelor’s degree from Marshall University in Huntington, WV, and her law degree from Vanderbilt University School of Law in Nashville, TN.

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

December 22, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Part VII Introduction This series focuses on four bankruptcy-related bills that were enacted during the 116th Congress and signed into law on August 23, 2019. One bill, the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), will be effective February 19, 2020. It appears in its entirety in Appendix B to...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
January 8, 2023
Post-petition repossession of debtor’s automobile, deliberate indifference to debtor’s request for return and ignoring hearings before the Court merit not only award of damages for violation of the stay but substantial punitive damages. (Bonapfel) In re Hamby, 2022 WL 17428947 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. November 29, 2022) Case Summary Cole Hamby purchased a 2012 GMC Sierra from Everybody Rides Auto Sales....
Members
August 8, 2021
By Academy Staff Section 1307(b) provides: On request of the debtor at any time, if the case has not been converted under Section 706, Section 1112, or Section 1208, the court shall dismiss a case under this chapter. This seemingly straightforward provision has generated significant litigation and produced multiple conflicting decisions. Does a Debtor have a right to dismiss a...
Members
emily-connor-kennedy
March 6, 2022
There are several different types of security clearances that an individual might seek as a prerequisite to employment. What each clearance requires depends on many factors, such as whether the person is a civilian or part of the armed forces, whether the clearance is for facility access only (versus access to sensitive documents), and the scope of the access in...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
September 24, 2023
In calculating projected disposable income, 13 debtor may deduct entire mortgage payment notwithstanding amount exceeds the housing allowance as established by the IRS Financial Standards Allowance.
Members
November 29, 2020
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART VI – CONSUMER FORECLOSURE PROCEDURES (CONCLUSION) Introduction In the consumer bankruptcy field, trustees and debtors' counsel often are uncomfortable with the rules in Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). In this series for the NACTT Academy, we have looked at numerous topics involving the interplay of Article...
Members
July 28, 2019
By Robert (Bob) Schuman, Owner/Managing Broker, Network Financial Group I’m a mortgage broker. In that role, I see close up the immense relief that a homeowner feels when they file Chapter 13. They are no longer forced to deal with collection calls and a multitude of letters that are aggressive and intimidating, threatening to take their car, foreclose on their...
ahern_larry_regular
April 30, 2023
Introduction One new rule and amendments to 16 rules took effect December 1, 2022.  Many reflected changes necessitated by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), and had been in place in the same or similar form on an interim basis since that legislation took effect.  Part 1 of this series summarized . . . It looks like you...
Members
June 16, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction – The Taggart Ruling Last year, the Ninth Circuit in In re Taggart1 ruled that an act in violation of the discharge injunction did not empower a court to find a creditor in contempt, if the creditor believed in good faith that the discharge injunction did not apply—even if...
Members
June 9, 2019
By Nicholas Miller, Third-Year Student, University of Texas School of Law, and Madison Haueisen, Second-Year Student, University of Texas School of Law The second issue at hand in this year’s Duberstein moot court problem involves a matter of statutory interpretation—specifically, whether §503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code allows a creditor to recover costs and expenses incurred in making a substantial contribution...
Members

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: