In Re Batzkiel

349 B.R. 581, 56 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1205, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 2094, 2006 WL 2597904
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Iowa
DecidedAugust 7, 2006
Docket06-00355
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 349 B.R. 581 (In Re Batzkiel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Batzkiel, 349 B.R. 581, 56 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1205, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 2094, 2006 WL 2597904 (Iowa 2006).

Opinion

ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(1)

PAUL J. KILBURG, Chief Judge.

This matter came before the undersigned on July 25, 2006 on Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(1). John F. Schmillen appeared for United States Trustee and Steven G. Klesner appeared for Debtors Chester W. and Cynthia K. Batzkiel. After the presentation of evidence and argument, the Court took the matter under advisement. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(A).

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Among the reforms contained in the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) is the addition of a Means Test, which, if certain criteria are satisfied, can create a rebuttable presumption of abuse. 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(2). The Means Test is contained in Form B22A, which every consumer debtor filing under BAPCPA must complete.

After Debtors filed their petition, Trustee disputed certain amounts listed in Form B22A. At time of trial, Trustee’s assertions were undisputed for all but one line item — vehicle operating expenses. While Trustee asserts that Debtors are eligible to claim $358 per month in expenses under the applicable IRS Local Standards, Debtors assert their actual, documented expenses are $650 per month. Debtors’ other expenses are high enough that the difference between the two amounts is outcome determinative for Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss. Thus, the sole issue before the Court is whether Debtors have presented special circumstances which rebut the presumption of abuse provided for in Section 707(b)(2) and embodied in Form B22A.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Debtors presented testimony and exhibits to document their financial circumstances. Debtors live in rural Iowa and each drives a significant distance to their place of employment. Mr. Batzkiel drives approximately 40 miles roundtrip daily to his workplace. Mrs. Batzkiel drives approximately 70 miles roundtrip to her workplace. Debtors’ circumstances have been complicated by Mr. Batzkiel’s numerous collisions with deer on the roadway. In 2006, he has collided with deer on three separate occasions. Between 2003 and 2005, he collided with deer on another four occasions. He leaves home at 4:30 a.m. and drives through areas heavily populated by deer. Because of these frequent collisions, his auto insurance carrier has threatened to drop their auto insurance policies if they file any further deer-related claims. As a consequence, Mr. Batzkiel has not filed any insurance claims and has been doing his own repair work. Thus, although the Court would ordinarily only consider the expenses for one vehicle for Mr. Batzkiel’s use, his circumstances warrant some consideration of the expense history of two vehicles, understanding that at any given time, one of the vehicles may be inoperable due to a deer collision.

Debtors’ high fuel costs are driven by two factors: their significant commuting distances and the increasing price of gas, which has continued to rise since the IRS set its Local Standards amount. Debtors’ vehicles get low gas mileage, further increasing their fuel costs. Debtors established that their gas expenses were approximately $373 per month. Receipts in *584 evidence show that Debtors’ average cost per gallon of gas was $2,759. Mrs. Batzkiel testified that her most recent gas purchase was $2.91, indicating that even in recent weeks, Debtors’ fuel expenses have continued to rise.

Because Debtors commute significant distances to their respective places of employment, their other vehicle operating costs are also higher than average. Debtors’ oil change cost for one vehicle averages $13.49 per month. Mr. Batzkiel performs his own oil changes for his two vehicles, for which no costs for materials were submitted to the Court. Debtors replace one set of tires each year, alternating between Mr. and Mrs. Batzkiel’s vehicles. Based on the recent replacement cost for Mrs. Batzkiel’s vehicle, tire replacement costs average $43.83 per month. Debtor’s auto insurance costs $147 per month. These documented costs total $577.32 per month. These expenses do not include annual vehicle registration costs or the amortized costs of any other maintenance for the vehicles, such as brakes, transmissions, routine repairs, and most significantly for Debtors, the cost of repairing vehicles damaged by deer collisions.

DISMISSAL UNDER § 707(b)

Section 707(b)(1) grants the Court authority to dismiss a Chapter 7 case where “the granting of relief would be an abuse of the provisions of this chapter.” 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(1). BAPCPA “eliminated ... [the] presumption in favor of •granting chapter 7 relief to the debtor.” 6 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 707.05[1] (Alan N. Resnick & Henry J. Sommer eds., 15th ed. rev.2005). Further, the threshold question for dismissal or conversion under § 707 changed from “substantial abuse” to simply “abuse.” Id. The Code specifies that “the court shall presume abuse exists” if the debtor’s gross income and disposable income exceed certain threshold amounts. 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(2) (emphasis added). The calculations set forth in Section 707(b)(2), which establish those threshold amounts, constitute what is commonly known as the “Means Test.” In re Johnson, 346 B.R. 256, 259-60 (Bankr.S.D.Ga.2006).

MEANS TEST

The pui-pose of the Means Test is to “determine whether a case should be dismissed as an abusive filing by measuring the debtor’s ability to fund a hypothetical chapter 13 plan.” In re Renicker, 342 B.R. 304, 308 (Bankr.W.D.Mo.2006). Section 707(b)(7) creates a “safe harbor” from the Means Test for debtors whose income (or combined income in the case of married debtors, even if only one files for bankruptcy) falls below the median household income for their state. 6 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 707.05[2][b] (citing 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(7)). Disabled veterans are also excepted from the Means Test, “but only if the indebtedness occurred primarily during a period during which the veteran was on active duty,” under § 707(b)(2)(D) of the Code. Id. ¶ 707.05[2][e], The Means Test focuses specifically on “current monthly income,” defined as “the debtor’s average monthly income for the six calendar months prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case.” In re Pak, 343 B.R. 239, 241 (Bankr.N.D.Cal.2006) (citing 11 U.S.C. § lOl(lOA)). Thus, debtors whose “current monthly income” exceeds the state median monthly income for their household size are subject to the Means Test, unless they meet the special exception for certain disabled veterans. Id.

Debtors reported “current monthly income” of $7,926.98, which is annualized at $95,123.76.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Torri Lyn Martir
M.D. Pennsylvania, 2024
In re Kuwik
511 B.R. 696 (N.D. Georgia, 2014)
In Re Stanley
438 B.R. 860 (D. South Carolina, 2010)
In Re Siler
426 B.R. 167 (W.D. North Carolina, 2010)
In Re Carrillo
421 B.R. 540 (D. Arizona, 2009)
In Re Budig
387 B.R. 12 (N.D. Iowa, 2008)
In Re Sadler
378 B.R. 780 (E.D. Texas, 2007)
In Re Scarafiotti
375 B.R. 618 (D. Colorado, 2007)
In Re Lightsey
374 B.R. 377 (S.D. Georgia, 2007)
In Re Martin
371 B.R. 347 (C.D. Illinois, 2007)
In Re Heath
371 B.R. 806 (E.D. Michigan, 2007)
In Re Delbecq
368 B.R. 754 (S.D. Indiana, 2007)
In Re Haman
366 B.R. 307 (D. Delaware, 2007)
In Re Ashraf
367 B.R. 151 (D. Arizona, 2007)
In Re Lenton
358 B.R. 651 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
349 B.R. 581, 56 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1205, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 2094, 2006 WL 2597904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-batzkiel-ianb-2006.