Schedule B 21. Other contingent and unliquidated claims of every nature, including tax refunds, counterclaims of the debtor, and rights to setoff claims.
Do it by filing a "motion to amend schedules of assets and liabilities".
Bankruptcy Rule 4004 provides in part that "In a chapter 7 liquidation case a complaint objecting to the debtor's discharge under § 727(a) of the Code shall be filed not later than 60 days following the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). " So amendment of the schedules should not affect the timing of the discharge order.
Rule 4004 also provides that "(b) Extension of time.
On motion of any party in interest, after hearing on notice, the court may extend for cause the time for filing a complaint objecting to discharge. The motion shall be filed before the time has expired." So unless such a motion is filed, the time for objecting to discharge is not extended.
If there is an available unused exemption for these claims you could claim it, but as I understand what you were saying, you probably would not pursue them, so I don't see why you would bother claiming an exemption.
You would put your best guess as to their value.
I don't believe a hearing is needed unless you or some other party wants one.
A detailed explanation might be a good idea so as to prevent the trustee from requesting another creditor's meeting.
If you put "unknown" it would, as a practical matter, work.
If there is extra exemption amount (in the bankruptcy blanket exemption amount, for example), you could claim it, sure. But since you are putting "unknown", the trustee may very well contest the exemption (upon the possibility that it is actually worth much more), thus delaying things.
I don't believe there is a specific official form for such a motion. You could check the Connecticut local bankruptcy rules to be sure. The trustee should not frown upon this, because the trustee possibly stands to profit from this (unless it is exempt), if the claim turns out to be valid, and large. If the trustee agrees with you regarding the exemption, it shouldn't make any difference to the trustee either way.
Yes, I believe that is how it works. You would "accept", then ask the next question, I would answer the 2nd question, and, if the second answer was also of value to you, you would accept that too.
Alternatively, you could give me a bonus. I would work out the same I guess.
do i file the amendment with the motion? Yes.
can the motion be denied? Yes, in theory, but the court would have to have a good reason. The whole idea is to be honest with the state of your finances. If the court were to deny it, you did your duty. I really doubt that this would be a problem.
and can i fax it in or do i have to mail it?
Depends on the particular bankruptcy court. You could call the clerk of court and ask.
the lateness of it makes me nervous, but you do not think that the trustee will delay the case? No.
As to the second question:
It is your argument, as I understand it, that by refusing to allow you to pick up your property from storage, and taking steps to sell it, they violated the automatic stay. This would turn upon whether they were exercising a valid possessory lien or, on the other hand, whether their remedy was limited to a motion for relief from stay (in effect forcing them to so move if they wanted to assert a possessory lien). I would suggest that they waived any claim to a possessory lien by their clear violation of the automatic stay when they took steps to sell the property.
Remember when you were in school, and would take a test? Did you ever answer a question one way (perhaps "yes" on a true/false), then go back and change it to "no", then scratch the "no" out and try to write "yes"? That is sort of what you are doing here. Don't worry so much.
Yes, perhaps it should have been on the Schedule d, but as long as the trustee and creditors get the idea, it is fine. So, no, it was not a big mistake. If you think they might be significantly misled by your failure to mention the lien on the statement of intention, amend that too. Otherwise, don't worry about it.
Yes as to all of it, except the part about the timing of the motion to avoid the lien. You touched on this in passing before, but I was focusing on the other issues. Would you please explain in detail what this is all about?
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).