August 22nd, 2010 by Questions
I recently filed for bankruptcy in november 2009 i paid my 200.00 for 9 months and sent in my income and expense statements for the 9 months as well. My spouse didn`t file bankruptcy but they want his income as well does he have to pay for me cause the trustee kept telling him I was his client not him. So I don`t think it is fair off him to pay it. Now they want 11 more months of income and expense statements so i can get my discharge in aug 2011. Do i have to send those extra income and expense statements in to them and if not will i be penalized.
Posted from: Alberta
One Response to “bankruptcy extension”
Please post a follow up comment below:
(Note: comments are reviewed by moderators and then posted after approval. In addition, due to high volume some of the comments might not be posted.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.
August 23, 2010 at 8:06 am, Barton Goth - Goth & Company Inc. -Trustee in Bankruptcy said:
There are two issues you have hit upon. The first deals withe the amendments that were made to the Canadian bankruptcy legislation on September 18, 2009. These amendments stipulated that if your income surpassed a threshold amount, then you bankruptcy was automatically extended from 9 to 21 months (and in some circumstances to 24 or 36 months). So for this additional time to be required your average income must appear to be greater than the threshold amount. With this extension the length of your payments is extended and potentially your obligation to send in the monthly statements.
The other issue you identified is your spouses income. In a bankruptcy the issue of surplus income exists. Meaning if your reach a threshold amount your monthly payment varies based on your percentage of the household income. So in order to accurately determine this monthly payment you need to provide proof of your spouses income. Interestingly enough the amendments in 2009 also provided another option. For those who refuse to disclose their spouses income there is an adjustment that can be done to the surplus income obligation that does not require your spouses information. The problem is that nine times out of then the result is your monthly payment is significantly higher. I suppose this is done by design so that there is a penalty for failing to disclose this information, but none the less it is an option.