.jpg)
Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
Settle something toget below 109(e) debt limit?Perhaps a 1099c ison the way?
If not purchase money in an anti-deficiency state, note is in default,
andcollateral is gone, thenI believethe debt isnon-contingent and
liquidated.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 6, 2011 4:43:53 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so let's put
him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties that
foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with the other
debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit almost by itself.
However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any indication as to if and
when they will, although its clear that they could. How does that factor into
the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the guy simply cannot afford to
go 11. Is he out of luck?
Todd Mannis, Esq.
Calabasas, CA
Settle something to get below 109(e) debt limit? Perhaps a 1099c is on the way?
If not purchase money in an anti-deficiency state, note is in default, and collateral is gone, then I believe the debt is non-contingent and liquidated.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: t_mannis <toddlaw@dslextreme.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Fri, May 6, 2011 4:43:53 PMSubject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so let's put him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties that foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with the other debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit almost by itself. However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any indication as to if and when they will, although its clear that they could. How does that factor into the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the guy simply cannot afford to go 11. Is he out of luck? Todd Mannis, Esq.Calabasas, CA
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
That's what I've done successfully in the past.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 6:34 PM, t_mannis wrote:
>
>
> For the sake of clarification, the deficiencies do not arise out of
> purchase money transactions.....2nd and 3rd generation re-fi's.
>
> However, in light of the fact that they are contingent and unliquidated,
> and therefore don't count towards 109 limits, I'm guessing all I need do is
> list them, perhaps put amount unknown, and check the "contingent" and
> "unliquidated" boxes on Schedule F?
>
> Todd Mannis
>
>
> --- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com, Giovanni Orantes wrote:
> >
> > If they were already foreclosed, the deficiency amounts are still
> contingent
> > and unliquidated and wouldn't count toward the 109(e) limits.
> >
> > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:43 PM, t_mannis wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so
> > > let's put him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental
> properties
> > > that foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say,
> with
> > > the other debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit
> > > almost by itself. However, they haven't YET come after him, or given
> any
> > > indication as to if and when they will, although its clear that they
> could.
> > > How does that factor into the debt limit equation? Practically
> speaking, the
> > > guy simply cannot afford to go 11. Is he out of luck?
> > >
> > > Todd Mannis, Esq.
> > > Calabasas, CA
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
> > Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
> > 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
> > Los Angeles, CA 90010
> > Tel: (213) 389-4362
> > Fax: (877) 789-5776
> > e-mail: go@...
>
> > website: www.gobklaw.com
> >
> > WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
> >
> > SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN
> BERNARDINO
> > AND SANTA BARBARA.
> >
> > Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
> > information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named.
> If
> > the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
> > responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this
> communication
> > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> > please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the
> original
> > e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
> >
> > IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed
> by
> > the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
> > contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not
> intended
> > to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
> > under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
> > recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
> >
>
>
>
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.com
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
AND SANTA BARBARA.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
For the sake of clarification, the deficiencies do not arise out of purchase money transactions.....2nd and 3rd generation re-fi's.
However, in light of the fact that they are contingent and unliquidated, and therefore don't count towards 109 limits, I'm guessing all I need do is list them, perhaps put amount unknown, and check the "contingent" and "unliquidated" boxes on Schedule F?
Todd Mannis
>
> If they were already foreclosed, the deficiency amounts are still contingent
> and unliquidated and wouldn't count toward the 109(e) limits.
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:43 PM, t_mannis wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so
> > let's put him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties
> > that foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with
> > the other debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit
> > almost by itself. However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any
> > indication as to if and when they will, although its clear that they could.
> > How does that factor into the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the
> > guy simply cannot afford to go 11. Is he out of luck?
> >
> > Todd Mannis, Esq.
> > Calabasas, CA
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
> Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
> 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
> Los Angeles, CA 90010
> Tel: (213) 389-4362
> Fax: (877) 789-5776
> e-mail: go@...
> website: www.gobklaw.com
>
> WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
>
> SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
> AND SANTA BARBARA.
>
> Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
> information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
> the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
> e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
>
> IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed by
> the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
> under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
> recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
If they were already foreclosed, the deficiency amounts are still contingent
and unliquidated and wouldn't count toward the 109(e) limits.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:43 PM, t_mannis wrote:
>
>
> In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so
> let's put him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties
> that foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with
> the other debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit
> almost by itself. However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any
> indication as to if and when they will, although its clear that they could.
> How does that factor into the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the
> guy simply cannot afford to go 11. Is he out of luck?
>
> Todd Mannis, Esq.
> Calabasas, CA
>
>
>
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.com
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
AND SANTA BARBARA.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed by
the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
If they were already foreclosed, the deficiency amounts are still contingent and unliquidated and wouldn't count toward the 109(e) limits.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:43 PM, t_mannis <toddlaw@dslextreme.com> wrote:
In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so let's put him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties that foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with the other debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit almost by itself. However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any indication as to if and when they will, although its clear that they could. How does that factor into the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the guy simply cannot afford to go 11. Is he out of luck?
Todd Mannis, Esq.Calabasas, CA
-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq. Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362Fax: (877) 789-5776e-mail: go@gobklaw.comwebsite: www.gobklaw.comWE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA.Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I see the word "POSSIBLE" deficiencies; which lead me to thinks...may be anargument can be made for a purchase money in one of those 80/20 set up. Purchase
money in foreclosure are gone.
Paul Horn
Attorney at Law
Certified Public Accountant
1045 E. Valley Blvd., Suite A215
San Gabriel, CA 91770
800-380-7076
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 6, 2011 4:43:53 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Debt Limits with POSSIBLE deficiencies
In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so let's
put him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties thatforeclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with the
other debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit almost by
itself. However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any indication as to
if and when they will, although its clear that they could. How does that factor
into the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the guy simply cannotafford to go 11. Is he out of luck?
Todd Mannis, Esq.
Calabasas, CA
I see the word "POSSIBLE" deficiencies; which lead me to thinks...may be an argument can be made for a purchase money in one of those 80/20 set up. Purchase money in foreclosure are gone. Paul HornAttorney at LawCertified Public Accountant1045 E. Valley Blvd., Suite A215San Gabriel, CA 91770800-380-7076
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
In a nutshell, potential client cannot pass Means Test for a 7. OK, so let's put him into a 13. Well, he had a couple expensive rental properties that foreclosed. The second on one is $300,000 alone. Needless to say, with the other debt that he has, that would put him over the unsecured limit almost by itself. However, they haven't YET come after him, or given any indication as to if and when they will, although its clear that they could. How does that factor into the debt limit equation? Practically speaking, the guy simply cannot afford to go 11. Is he out of luck?
Todd Mannis, Esq.
Calabasas, CA
The post was migrated from Yahoo.