.jpg)
Ch. 13 liquidation analysis in BestCase for joint owned property
woops..hit send too soon before
On 1/22/2010 11:09 AM, Mark J. Markus wrote:
>
> If anyone on here uses Best Case for Ch. 13 cases, please contact me
> off list (mark@bklaw.com) about the following:
>
> When you have real estate in which the debtor owns a partial interest
> as joint tenant, the liquidation analysis doesn't work properly
> because it adds the full amount of the value of the property, thus
> showing more equity than is really there, and it does NOT account for
> the co-owners separate homestead exemption. I can't figure out how to
> make this work. Best Case said to just list 1/2 the value of the
> property, but that isn't accurate because the value to the debtor is
> actually half of the net EQUITY after secured debts are subtracted,
> not have of the gross value. To do it the other way, the secured
> debts would get subtracted twice, and either way the joint owner's
> separate homestead exemption doesn't get factored in.
>
> How do you handle this??
>
>
> *************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this
> means at
> http://bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/2008/0 ... efinition/)
>
> ________________________________________________
> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law
> office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is
> intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the
> addressee, note that any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the
> contents of this message is prohibited.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements
> imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained
> in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or
> written 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 in this communication.
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.