Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months out
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 11:11 am
charset="UTF-8"
Agreed that you should file a correct means test form, and that filing two
is confusing. But I also think you need to file a second form to show that
the amortized income doesnt push them beyond the limits of the means test.
Id file the amortized form as an exhibit to the declaration, or note on the
ECF filing that it is a supplement to the real one you filed with the
petition, and does not supplant it.
* John D. Faucher
On 5/19/10 11:02 AM, "Mark J. Markus" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> I prefer the method of filing a "correct" means test form, and then an
> explanatory declaration (or explanation letter) as David suggested. I think
> filing two means test forms is confusing, unnecessary and has the potential
> to create additional problems.
> *************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>
>
> On 5/19/2010 10:58 AM, Holly Roark wrote:
>>
>> If you were to file the TWO Form 22's (one with the actual 6 month period,
>> and one with the income amortized over 12 months), when you file the case
>> online, do you indicate that there IS a presumption of abuse, or that there's
>> NOT a presumption of abuse, since on one of the forms there is, and on the
>> other there's not? My thought is that you would indicate there IS a
>> presumption of abuse but that you are rebutting it with the second means test
>> and with a letter to the UST. Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> Holly Roark
>>
>> holly@roarklawoffices.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 8:33 AM, David A. Tilem
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Holly:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I can't really remember where we filed the cases, but we have never had a
>>> problem providing MORE than sufficient information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> David A. Tilem
>>>
>>> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>>>
>>> Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
>>>
>>> 206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
>>>
>>> Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal
>>> Specialization.
>>>
>>> Business bankruptcy specialist cert. by Amer. Bd. of Certification
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
Of
>>> Holly Roark
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 8:13 PM
>>> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months
>>> out of the year
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> David, have you done either of the two approaches you suggest (in downtown),
>>> and if so, how did it work out? I am having this issue come up more and
>>> more and sometimes it's just not feasible to wait it out to file, so I need
>>> to do something. Does an explanatory letter to the UST really suffice if
>>> you file it as a presumption of abuse?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Holly Roark
>>>
>>> holly@roarklawoffices.com
>>>
>>> CDCA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 6:47 PM, David A. Tilem
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Teacher income:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do 2 means test forms. The first one should be "straight", i.e. use
>>>> whatever they actually earned in the prior 6 months. The second one can be
>>>> amortized over 12 months. The other alternative to a 2nd means test is to
>>>> include sufficient explanation so the USTE understands that this is a
>>>> teacher with a 10 month paycheck. I suspect either solution will work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David A. Tilem
>>>>
>>>> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>>>>
>>>> Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
>>>>
>>>> 206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
>>>>
>>>> Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal
>>>> Specialization.
>>>>
>>>> Business bankruptcy specialist cert. by Amer. Bd. of Certification
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
f Of
>>>> Robert
>>>> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 2:54 PM
>>>> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months out
>>>> of the year
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By Golly I have the EXACT same situation with a teacher who is earning a
>>>> paycheck 10 months out of the year.
>>>>
>>>> I have advised the client to wait until the end of summer to file.
>>>>
>>>> I plan on using the last 6 months of actual income (which will be 4 months
>>>> of income and 2 months without) for the means test.
>>>>
>>>> My client passes under these numbers.
>>>>
>>>> For me, the question is the Schedule J amount! I am not sure what to put in
>>>> there. I am guessing taking the salaried amount earned per year and then
>>>> dividing that by 12.
>>>>
>>>> --- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com , Catherine
>>>> Christiansen wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>> > In Riverside, the Chapter 13 Trustee takes year to date and divides by
>>>>> the number of months to calculate the income and then runs that through
>>>>> the B-22 test.
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Law Office of Catherine Christiansen
>>>>> > 1077 E Pacific Coast Hwy #210
>>>>> > Seal Beach, CA, 90740
>>>>> > Tel: (562) 361-8721
>>>>> > Fax: (562) 490-8572
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --- On Wed, 4/14/10, Jim Selth wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I
>>>>
>>>>> > do not think that's allowed when completing the B22 form. I believe
>>>>> you must
>>>>
>>>>> > include the actual income received in each of the six prior months
>>>>> before the
>>>>> > case is filed.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > James R. Selth
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > [mailto:cdcbaa@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Catherine Christiansen
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 4:09 PM
>>>>> >
>>>>> > To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups. com
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months
>>>>> > out of the year
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have been taking the
>>>>
>>>>> > average income. Multiplying the monthly by 10 and dividing by 12 and
>>>>> > using 6 months of those figures on the B-22. Anyone experiencing
>>>>
>>>>> > a problem with that approach on other cases they have filed with school
>>>>> > teachers?
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Law Office of Catherine Christiansen
>>>>> >
>>>>> > 1077 E Pacific Coast Hwy #210
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Seal Beach, CA, 90740
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Tel: (562) 361-8721
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Fax: (562) 490-8572
>>>>> >
>>>>> > attorneychristianse n@gmail.com
>>>>> > This e-mail is private and confidential
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --- On Wed, 4/14/10, Law Offices of Jonathan Leventhal
>>>>>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months
>>>>> out of
>>>>> > the year
>>>>> >
>>>>> > To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups. com
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Date: Wednesday, April 14, 2010, 2:12 PM
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Also note the fact that in the
>>>>> > near future the income will be zero.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > [mailto:cdcbaa@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Henry Toles
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:43 PM
>>>>> >
>>>>> > To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups. com
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months
>>>>> > out of the year
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Wait
>>>>> > two more months and then file
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > [mailto:cdcbaa@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Donny Brand
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:42 PM
>>>>> >
>>>>> > To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups. com
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months
>>>>> > out of the year
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hello,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have the same deal going on
>>>>> > in one of my cases right now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > My thoughts are " no " you
>>>>> > cannot do that. The means test deals with the 6 months beginning with
>>>>> > the month preceding the month of filing backwards. The legislature
>>>>> must
>>>>
>>>>> > have known this is going to produce absurd results in many, many cases.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I think the appropriate way of
>>>>> > dealing with it is to file the means test with a presumption of abuse
>>>>> " and
>>>>
>>>>> > then rebut the presumption if need be. Hopefully, OUST will simply
>>>>
>>>>> > decline to file a motion to dismiss based upon all the facts in your
>>>>> case.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Is anyone else doing it any
>>>>
>>>>> > other way?
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Particularly any of our
>>>>
>>>>> > members who have been practicing since the Nelson Act?
>>>>> > (Sorryjust following in the spirits of some of the other posts>>>>> today!)
>>>>
>>>>
charset="UTF-8"
Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months out of the year
Agreed that you should file a correct means test form, and that filing two is confusing. But I also think you need to file a second form to show that the amortized income doesn’t push them beyond the limits of the means test. I’d file the amortized form as an exhibit to the declaration, or note on the ECF filing that it is a supplement to the real one you filed with the petition, and does not supplant it.
John D. Faucher
On 5/19/10 11:02 AM, "Mark J. Markus" <bklawr@yahoo.com> wrote:
I prefer the method of filing a "correct" means test form, and then an explanatory declaration (or explanation letter) as David suggested. I think filing two means test forms is confusing, unnecessary and has the potential to create additional problems.
*************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
<snip>
On 5/19/2010 10:58 AM, Holly Roark wrote:
If you were to file the TWO Form 22's (one with the actual 6 month period, and one with the income amortized over 12 months), when you file the case online, do you indicate that there IS a presumption of abuse, or that there's NOT a presumption of abuse, since on one of the forms there is, and on the other there's not? My thought is that you would indicate there IS a presumption of abuse but that you are rebutting it with the second means test and with a letter to the UST. Thoughts?
Holly Roark
holly@roarklawoffices.com
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 8:33 AM, David A. Tilem <DavidTilem@tilemlaw.com> wrote:
Holly:
I can't really remember where we filed the cases, but we have never had a problem providing MORE than sufficient information.
David A. Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*†
Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
* Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal Specialization.
† Business bankruptcy specialist cert. by Amer. Bd. of Certification
From: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Holly Roark
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 8:13 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months out of the year
David, have you done either of the two approaches you suggest (in downtown), and if so, how did it work out? I am having this issue come up more and more and sometimes it's just not feasible to wait it out to file, so I need to do something. Does an explanatory letter to the UST really suffice if you file it as a presumption of abuse?
Holly Roark
holly@roarklawoffices.com
CDCA
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 6:47 PM, David A. Tilem <DavidTilem@tilemlaw.com> wrote:
Teacher income:
Do 2 means test forms. The first one should be "straight", i.e. use whatever they actually earned in the prior 6 months. The second one can be amortized over 12 months. The other alternative to a 2nd means test is to include sufficient explanation so the USTE understands that this is a teacher with a 10 month paycheck. I suspect either solution will work.
David A. Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*†
Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
* Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal Specialization.
† Business bankruptcy specialist cert. by Amer. Bd. of Certification
From: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 2:54 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: Means Test for Teacher who is employed 8 months out of the year
By Golly I have the EXACT same situation with a teacher who is earning a paycheck 10 months out of the year.
I have advised the client to wait until the end of summer to file.
I plan on using the last 6 months of actual income (which will be 4 months of income and 2 months without) for the means test.
My client passes under these numbers.
For me, the question is the Schedule J amount! I am not sure what to put in there. I am guessing taking the salaried amount earned per year and then dividing that by 12.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.