.jpg)
OUST Position - One Person/One Car
Donny:
This is a new position they are taking. They are a bit slow but they
have somewhat of an agenda and are cherry picking the issues they want
to stand firm on. They used to let the two car thing slide but not
anymore. I think they are on much weaker ground when you have two car
payments for a single debtor. The debt still gets them the double
ownership deduction.
Jim King
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
*
Some case law from NACBA materials:
Individual Debtors with more than one vehicle*.
*
expense for two vehicles. (In re Zaporski, 366 B.R. 758 (Bankr.
E.D. Mich. 2007) (Chapter 7); Cf., Transportation: Ownership,
Individual Debtor with more than one vehicle 2:76-2:77)
*
single Debtor may not deduct the expense of more than one
vehicle. The Office of the United States Trustee generally takes
the position that a single Debtor is entitled only to a single vehicle
operation expense unless an additional vehicle is reasonable and
necessary. (In re Aprea, 368 B.R. 558 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. 2007)
(Chapter 13) (declining to allow Debtor a second operating
expense for vehicle operated by unemployed finance))
*
(Form B22A, Lines 23-24/Form B22C, Lines 28-29)
What is a vehicle?
Casey, 356 B.R. 519 (Bankr. E.D. Wash. 2006) (Chapter 13) (assuming
motorcycle a vehicle); See also, Transportation: Vehicle Operation, What
is a Vehicle 2:66 for the position of the Office of the United States
Trustee for the definition of a vehicle.
19
*
How many ownership expenses may be claimed?
General principles.
vehicles. (Form B22A, Lines 23 and 24 and Form B22C, Lines 28
and 29) The Office of the United States Trustee takes the position
that absent reasonable circumstances, a single Debtor may claim
expenses for only a single vehicle.
*
Individual Debtors with more than one vehicle*.
*
expense for two vehicles. (In re Styles, 397 B.R. 771 (Bankr. W.D.
Va. 2008) (Chapter 13); In re Comstock, 389 B.R. 888 (Bankr.
N.D. Cal. 2008) (Chapter 7); In re Scurlock, 385 B.R. 814 (Bankr.
M.D. N.C. 2008) (Chapter 13); In re Barrett, 371 B.R. 860, 863
(BAnkr. S.D. Ill. 2007) (Chapter 13); In re Zaporski, 366 B.R. 758
(Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2007) (Chapter 7); See also, discussion at
Expense 2:69)
*
individual Debtor more than one vehicle ownership expense. The
Office of the United States Trustee takes the position that a single
Debtor may only claim an ownership expense for one vehicle, at
least in a Chapter 13.
*
What is included in the ownership expense?
a lien, and possibly to vehicles not encumbered by a lien (See, discussion
at Transportation Ownership/Lease Expenses, Debtors with vehicles not
encumbered by a lien 2:82-2:83), as well as to leased vehicles. (Form
B22A, Line 23 and Form B22C, Line 28)
*
What is the proper amount of the ownership expense?
Purchased vehicles.
a fixed allowance, and not a cap. (In re Kimbro, 389 B.R. 518 (6th
Cir. BAP 2008) (Chapter 13); In re Musselman, 394 B.R. 801
(E.D. N.C. 2008) (Chapter 13))
*
is a cap, and not a fixed allowance. ((In re Ransom, 577 F.3d 1026
20
(9th Cir. 2009) (Chapter 13) (holding a Debtor who owned a
vehicle free and clear of liens was not entitled to an ownership
expense); In re Slusher, 359 B.R. 290 (Bankr. Nev. 2007) (Chapter
13))
Holly Roark
CDCA
holly@roarklawoffices.com
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:30 PM, brandspellman wrote:
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I was told recently that the OUST is taking the position that if you are a
> single household chapter 7 debtor, they will object to line 22A if you take
> more than $283 in vehicle operation deductions -- even if you own operate
> more than one vehicle.
>
> Also, they will object if you try taking both line 23 AND line 24
> deductions on the same grounds...even if you indeed do own two (2) vehicles.
>
> Has anyone had any success in litigating this issue? Is there case law
> anyone can point me towards?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Donny Brand
> Brand & Spellman PC
> 3836 E Anaheim St.
> Long Beach, CA 90804
> Tel: (562) 438-7500
> Fax: (562) 438-8500
>
>
>
Holly Roark
holly@roarklawoffices.com
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California
Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
Some case law from NACBA materials:
Individual Debtors with more than one vehicle.
2:68 Debtors cases. A single Debtor may claim an operation
expense for two vehicles. (In re Zaporski, 366 B.R. 758 (Bankr.
E.D. Mich. 2007) (Chapter 7); Cf., Transportation: Ownership,
Individual Debtor with more than one vehicle 2:76-2:77)
2:69 Creditors cases.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Same with Chapter 13s?
Holly Roark
CDCA
holly@roarklawoffices.com
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:30 PM, brandspellman wrote:
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I was told recently that the OUST is taking the position that if you are a
> single household chapter 7 debtor, they will object to line 22A if you take
> more than $283 in vehicle operation deductions -- even if you own operate
> more than one vehicle.
>
> Also, they will object if you try taking both line 23 AND line 24
> deductions on the same grounds...even if you indeed do own two (2) vehicles.
>
> Has anyone had any success in litigating this issue? Is there case law
> anyone can point me towards?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Donny Brand
> Brand & Spellman PC
> 3836 E Anaheim St.
> Long Beach, CA 90804
> Tel: (562) 438-7500
> Fax: (562) 438-8500
>
>
>
Holly Roark
holly@roarklawoffices.com
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California
Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
Same with Chapter 13s?
Holly Roark
CDCA
holly@roarklawoffices.com
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:30 PM, brandspellman <brandspellman@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hello everyone, I was told recently that the OUST is taking the position that if you are a single household chapter 7 debtor, they will object to line 22A if you take more than $283 in vehicle operation deductions Also, they will object if you try taking both line 23 AND line 24 deductions on the same grounds...even if you indeed do own two (2) vehicles.Has anyone had any success in litigating this issue? Is there case law anyone can point me towards?
Thank you, Donny BrandBrand & Spellman PC3836 E Anaheim St.Long Beach, CA 90804Tel: (562) 438-7500Fax: (562) 438-8500
-- Holly Roarkholly@roarklawoffices.comwww.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of CaliforniaConsumer Bankruptcy Attorney
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hello everyone,
I was told recently that the OUST is taking the position that if you are a single household chapter 7 debtor, they will object to line 22A if you take more than $283 in vehicle operation deductions -- even if you own operate more than one vehicle.
Also, they will object if you try taking both line 23 AND line 24 deductions on the same grounds...even if you indeed do own two (2) vehicles.
Has anyone had any success in litigating this issue? Is there case law anyone can point me towards?
Thank you,
Donny Brand
Brand & Spellman PC
3836 E Anaheim St.
Long Beach, CA 90804
Tel: (562) 438-7500
Fax: (562) 438-8500
The post was migrated from Yahoo.