OUST Audits
Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:51 pm
Just to chime in and share my experiences, it was my 1 in a 1000 "turn in
the barrel," as the old joke goes. I just recently completed my audit, and
despite the stated "reduce the burdens" language of the 2007 press release,
there was still a request for a whole bunch of documents (bank account
statements, pay advices, etc). There was a very short deadline.
After compliance and delivery of the documents to AuditCo, within about 5
days they had reviewed and analyzed them, with a series of questions about
the documents and how they may or may not be consistent with the petition.
There was a request for explanations in like 10 days.
Not long after that (whole process, about 30 days), there was an email to me
from AuditCo, cc'ing OUST with their findings. I was invited to reply to
have my say about them. In my particular instance -- a Chapter 13 -- the
final Line 59 of B22 was off a bit (we had a bottom line of $500, thus
conceding the 13 was not a 3-yr term). AuditCo says Line 59 should have
been higher based on missing stubs we didn't insist on prior to filing from
an old job the joint debtor no longer has. She started a new job the month
before filing and Schedule I was based stubs for that job, not the average
income of a job she no longer had. Thus, while we normally do try to get
all pay advices for the six months prior to filing, we didn't push to get
all her stubs from old job from an uncooperative client due to their
mootness, and instead tried to nail the plan payment based on current
income. I explained this in my reply to the OUST. (Kagenveama and Lanning
are quite timely, indeed!)
We'll see what happens next.
Hale
The post was migrated from Yahoo.