San Antonio Bankruptcy Lawyers not only explains the legislative acts and regulation chapters elaborately to you but it states different case studies to you so that your understating is more clear and accurate. Unless you see or hear about real-life experiences, you will not be able to relate yourself to the situation. This might leave traces of confusion and doubts with you about the efficiency and credibility of your attorney. ‘San Antonio Bankruptcy Lawyers’ say that only theoretical knowledge of a subject never going to do hundred percent justice to your cognition. You have to understand the case studies and retaliate with it.
Here the ‘San Antonio Bankruptcy lawyers’ highlight two of the most common types of bankruptcy case studies that will help you to understand what regulations are being summoned in which condition.
Mr. X is a 34-year-old building constructor. His monthly salary is 15,00 US dollars. He stays with his fiancé in a rented apartment that cost them 500 dollars.
Mr. X lost his job when the construction career came downtown 3 years ago. He faced severe rigidity in finding a new job that led him to borrow more and more from his credit cards. He already had prior existing loans, credit cards and different store cards which worsen the financial more for Mr. X as his debt grew to sky-height. The unemployment stipend did do much help to him as it was never enough to meet up with all his bill amounts.
He was charged with arrears on water bill because during the time of asking help, his total credit debt accumulation was 12,000 US dollars and he owed it to 11 different creditors.
Mr. X was advised to file bankruptcy by ‘San Antonio Bankruptcy Lawyers’, as it is the only option left over. They stated so because:-
Mr. X had no extra income even at the time he was doing a temporary job. So there is practically no realistic chance of him to repay any of the amounts to lenders.
The industry in which he was employed to was not affected by the bankruptcy, so could continue working.
As he was staying in a rented house, he had no home loans and simultaneously he had less chance to have a reduction in his monthly rental cost.
The prime reason of bankruptcy in Mr. X’s case was lack of employment that led him to be unable to pay the creditors.
Fortunately, he did not come under any strict and hard arrears as his stayed in a rented house. He paid for the rent. And creditors had no option to sell off any of his assets as nothing was available to cover up their money. So the creditors had no other choice but quitting on to their money.
Mrs. A is a professor. She is 40years old with a monthly income of 1,100 US dollars. She is the joint holder of a mortgage of her home, with her husband. The mortgage has no equity in it. She is having an unsecured debt of 26,000 US dollars due to going through a lengthy period off sick and being on statutory sick pay. She is having 8 different creditors to repay all the debt amount that cost her a monthly payment of 526 US dollars. She is having a joint debt with her husband. She owns a posh car, outright whose market value is 6000 US dollars, at present. Mrs. A is left out with only 50 US dollars, once all her bills and living expenses are met.
Even if she is having a considerate DRO amount, the total amount payable for the debt is too high to cover and consider it. Even a DMP or IVA would not be considered as not enough account is left over each month. ‘San Antonio Lawyers’ advice a bankruptcy.
As she has no equity on the mortgaged house of hers, a sale is not considered as that would raise no money for the creditors and the lenders.
But she cannot add up the joint debt to her petition for bankruptcy as it is joint with her husband, he becomes solely responsible to repay it back. The husband has an adequate monthly income so it never is a problem for them.
If the house had sufficient equity and the husband lacked enough income to meet both ends the ‘San Antonio Lawyers’ would have suggested a sale of the property.