Getting conflicting information...GA Law

[turnkey803]

What is the name of your state? GA

After reading on-line and speaking with a couple of attorneys...

1. Is it true that I can file for free on-line, if so where? (In GA)

2. I understand I am required to pay a certain amount to file. May I ask to stretch the terms (I am single mother, no child support, but recently employed for the first time in a year since losing my business...had no unemployment and living off my cards as best as I could for 12 months. The new job is 1/3 of what I used to make.)

The equity in my home and vehicle is almost nothing...I lost my business the month after I bought my home. Still 10,000 on my car. (Already reserched alternatives on both, I need to keep both and can afford if I can get out from underneath the unsecurred debt.)

3. I am getting conflicting information about the new laws in GA. Do I have to set a payment plan for all my debt over the next 5 years (IN GA), or does chapter 7 release me completely from the debt? I plan to "re-assume" the mortgage and vehicle, I understand that my credit card companies are not interested in my re-assuming after speaking with them...does not make sence to me, but that's what they said.

Thanks for any direction.

Regards.What is the name of your state?

[Ladynred]

I am getting conflicting information about the new laws in GA. Do I have to set a payment plan for all my debt over the next 5 years (IN GA), or does chapter 7 release me completely from the debt?

Bankruptcy laws are FEDERAL, so the state has nothing to do with it beyond the allowed exemptions.

If your income is below the state median income level, then you will most likely 'pass' the means test and you can file Ch 7. However, it's no guarantee. Even if your income is below the median, if you have at least $100/mo in DISPOSABLE income, you could still be pushed into a 5 year CH 13 repayment plan. If you qualify for Ch 7, then all your unsecured dischargeable debts will be gone in about 3 months.

I plan to "re-assume" the mortgage and vehicle,

The term is REAFFIRM and unless you HAVE to, you shouldn't. If you've had the car less than 910 days then you'll be stuck reaffirming. If you've owned the house less than 4-1/2 years, you'll be stuck with reaffirming. However, there have been some "910 rule' cases lately on the vehicle. If your loan included anything OTHER than JUST the car financing, you may be able to 'strip down' the loan to just the market value of the vehicle.

This is why you need a lawyer.

[turnkey803]

Then wouldn't I lose my home and car? Since I will then have bad credit I will not be able to buy again at the rates I have now.

I bought my vehicle last year brand new, made extra payment (not relizing where I would be in a year) so I only have 1/2 left to pay (10,000).

[HomeGuru]

[QUOTE=Ladynred

This is why you need a lawyer

**A: I just love good advice and to the point.

[Ladynred]

Then wouldn't I lose my home and car?

NO ! If you do NOT have to reaffirm, then it's usually recommended that you don't. You STILL have to keep paying to keep the house and car, the loans are secured by the property. They can only take that property if you stop paying.

I bought my vehicle last year brand new, made extra payment (not relizing where I would be in a year) so I only have 1/2 left to pay (10,000).

You're going to be stuck reaffirming it, you have not owned it for more than 910 days. You have half left to pay.. and the car probably isn't worth what you still owe anymore.

[Gregeney]

It is still a bit of a grey area.

[url]http://news.lp.findlaw.com/andrews/bf/bnk/20070330/20070330_rice.html[/url]

I recommend that debtors reaffirm any personal property they wish to keep. Most don't want any possibility of losing a car even when the payments are current. But that link makes a very valid point in that the creditor would still need backing of the State court to take the property. But I have seen wording in financing contracts that defines a bankruptcy as automatic default. There still be an option for ride-through if the creditor chooses to accept it. But they don't have to.

The new code doesn't address ride-through for real property. I'm not aware of the 11th circuit making an opinion on the matter.