Optional mortgage payment amounts?
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:49 pm
By no means am I advising the Debtor to use the negative amortization
number - he has been doing that in the past simply because he's
strapped for cash. My only concern was if I plug in say the interest
only amount, would I have a problem with the UST saying "yeah but you
haven't in fact been paying that amount."
This is a 7, not a 13, by the way, so there is no confirmation,
obviously...but I think your points are quite valid - he can't be
required to take on more debt. So, unless I'm misreading this, it
sounds like I'm quite safe using at least the interest only amount
for means test purposes, and if so, we're in business!
Thanks so much!
Todd Mannis
>
> And if you advise the debtor to use the negative am number, you
would be
> running afoul of the prohibition against attorneys advising debtors
to take
> on new debt.
>
>
>
> Patrick T. Green, Esq.
>
> Fitzgerald & Green
>
> Attorneys at Law
>
> 1010 E. Union Street
>
> Suite 206
>
> Pasadena, CA 91106
>
> Tel: 626-449-8433
>
> Fax: 626-449-0565
>
> pat@...
>
>
>
Behalf Of P
> L
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 5:24 PM
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Optional mortgage payment amounts?
>
>
>
> Since a negative amortization payment amount would result in the
debtor
> incurring additional debt (a standard confirmation order
prohibition), using
> the interest only or fully amortized payment in the means test is
arguably
> the better number.
>
>
>
> t_mannis wrote:
>
> (Prospective) client has a loan on his house whereby as indicated
on
> his statement, he has four options. He can pay a) an absolute
> minimum payment which is basically neg-am; b) he can make an
interest
> only payment; c) he can make principal and interest on 30 yr term,
or
> d) principal and interest on 15 year term.
>
> For past six or seven months, he has been making the absolute
minimum
> payment (neg-am) which is $1,200 per month. You can see where this
> is going - its not working out on the means test. If he had
> a "normal" interest only payment ($2,400/month), he is home free.
>
> For means test purposes, is he limited to using that absolute
minimum
> payment, even though its negative amortization? Or is there
> a "reasonable" payment (interest only) that would suffice for means
> test purposes? If it is a question of what he has been doing in the
> past, is it worth it to have him start paying at least interest
> only? For how long?
>
> Todd Mannis
> toddlaw@...
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
Try
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.