Topeka's Only Consumer Bankruptcy Law Specialists Now Helping Borrowers with Federal Student Loans
PLAN MAY NOT PROPOSE EARLY PAYOFF BUT 1329 MAY ALLOW POST
CONFIRMATION MODIFICATION
In re Kidd, et al, Case No. 06-41232
August 2007, Judge Karlin
The Court recognized changes in 1324(b)(4) and held that debtors may not propose an early pay off but may obtain the same in the right circumstances via 1329.
Digest by:Â Jan Hamilton, Trustee
B22C CONTROLS, OR IF DEBTOR USES I AND J, MUST HAVE A FIVE YEAR PLAN
In re Beckerle, Case No.06-20572
April 2007, Judge Berger
ACP is a time frame of either 3 or 5 years and not a multiplier. B22C is a starting place in determining projected disposable income to be received in the 5-year period. A negative number on B22C indicates the plan is not feasible. Debtor can’t have it both ways. If the debtor relies upon I and J to prove feasibility, then the debtor must commit to a 5-year program.
Digest by:Â Jan Hamilton, Trustee
ACP IS FIXED BUT PLAN PAYMENT IS NOT
In re Anderson, Case No. 06-20664
April 2007, Judge Berger
Applicable Commitment Period is determined as of the date of filing, but the amount of the plan payment is determined as of the effective date of the plan under 1325(b). Again, the Court noted that the trustee is not required to object.
Digest by:Â Jan Hamilton, Trustee
