Check out some similar questions!

JaneSmith54 · Nov 9, 2008, 06:42 AM

I have been paying criminal court-ordered restitution to someone for many, many years. That person filed for bankruptcy without listing his on-going civil case against me, as an asset. Also the person did not list the money I have been paying him, monthly, for many years, as income. I have paid him tens of thousands of dollars, including well over ten thousand dollars since he filed for bankruptcy. Some of the debts he is writing off in the bankruptcy are the medical bills the restitution was for. Should my payments be going to the Trustee, so the creditors can get the money they are supposed to be getting? I did something really stupid, many years ago, and I don't mind paying for it, but it doesn't seem right for me to reimburse someone for medical bills they aren't planning to pay. :confused:

excon · Nov 9, 2008, 07:25 AM

Hello J:

Your obligations are to pay the restitution. THAT should be the extent of your involvement. Whatever the payee wants to do with the money isn't any concern of yours.

I'm certain the court ordered your payments to be directed in a certain manner. I would NOT disobey the court order. It would be my advice that you continue to pay as you have been.

I don't even know why you're aware of his personal life. If it bothers you what he does with the money, stop checking him out.

excon

Fr_Chuck · Nov 9, 2008, 07:34 AM

Yes, and remember this is "paying them back" it is not income it is being paid back money that was for a loss.

It is as you took this away and now owe it back,

This is not income, no taxes are paid.

But this is also public record, the bankruptcy court when they check the record of the person filing would have seen this listed.

And to be honest you owe it, you pay it, what they do is really not your concern, expect you have to follow your court order.

JaneSmith54 · Nov 9, 2008, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello J:

Your obligations are to pay the restitution. THAT should be the extent of your involvement. Whatever the payee wants to do with the money isn't any concern of yours.

I'm certain the court ordered your payments to be directed in a certain manner. I would NOT disobey the court order. It would be my advice that you continue to pay as you have been.

I don't even know why you're aware of his personal life. If it bothers you what he does with the money, stop checking him out.

excon

I have not been "checking him out." I am aware of the bankruptcy because my attorneys sent the information to me. He has a civil judgment against me, which may be invalid because he neglected to report the pending civil suit and the monthly income, in his bankruptcy. Again, I don't mind paying for what I did, but I feel this person shouldn't be cheating others out of medical bills that I have been paying him for. Do you think it's fair that I fulfill my obligation to him, but that he not fulfill his obligations for medical services that were provide to him? Do you think it's okay for him to commit what may be bankruptcy fraud, in order to keep the money the judge ordered reimbursed for the medical bills, especially when he may be getting all that, plus a lot more, from me?

JaneSmith54 · Nov 9, 2008, 07:55 AM

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

yes, and remember this is "paying them back" it is not income it is being paid back money that was for a loss.

It is as you took this away and now owe it back,

This is not income, no taxes are paid.

But this is also public record, the bankruptcy court when they check the record of the person filing would have seen this listed.

And to be honest you owe it, you pay it, what they do is really not your concern, expect you have to follow your court order.

How did I "take this away" if he never paid it? We're not talking about other damages, I have been ordered to pay to him, those are a separate issue. If I was ordered to pay the person $20K for medical bills and he got the money from me, but the medical bills didn't get paid, the hospital and doctors got screwed. (Which means all of us with health insurance and who pay taxes get screwed, too.)

You are mistaken if you think the bankruptcy court was aware of this issue. They were not aware of the pending civil suit, or the restitution, and I believe that constitutes bankruptcy fraud.

excon · Nov 9, 2008, 08:20 AM

Originally Posted by JaneSmith54

Do you think it's fair that I fulfill my obligation to him, but that he not fulfill his obligations? Do you think it's fair that I fulfill my obligation to him, but that he not fulfill his obligations for medical services that were provide to him?

Hello again, Jane:

I think the WORLD is unfair... I think my taxes should NEVER have gone towards making a war of choice upon Iraq... But, I'm still going to pay them.

And, I don't disagree with you at all about him being "unfair". But, your obligation is to PAY - not to concern yourself with how the money is spent. I'm certain your court order doesn't say anything about not having to pay if you disagree with how the money is spent.

Look. My obligation is to you. I want to make YOU happy. I want to solve YOUR legal problems. Fair, or right, or good has NOTHING to do with your obligation to pay. It has to do with following a court order so that you not get found in CONTEMPT of that court.

My suggestion that you stop "checking him out", was strictly a personal one. If reading about him is so upsetting, DON'T read about him.

excon

JaneSmith54 · Nov 9, 2008, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Jane:

Look. My obligation is to you. I want to make YOU happy. I want to solve YOUR legal problems. Fair, or right, or good has NOTHING to do with your obligation to pay. It has to do with following a court order so you not get found in CONTEMPT of that court.

My suggestion that you stop "checking him out", was strictly a personal one. If reading about him is so upsetting, DON'T read about him.

excon

excon,

Thanks for your input and concern. I haven't quit paying, nor do I plan to, in spite of the fact that I could have, YEARS AGO, without the risk of contempt of court. As soon as my probation ended, the courts started sending my payments back to me, saying I had fulfilled my obligation through the court system. I checked with an attorney, who told me the most that could happen if I stopped paying, after that, was the person could file a civil suit against me for the balance of the restitution. Out of a moral obligation, I continued paying the person, directly, and I didn't do it because of the already-pending civil litigation. Ironically, I thought that had expired, and was unaware it was still pending, for several years... but I still kept paying, because it was the "right" thing to do.

I only wish I could take your advice stop reading about this person, but my email and snail mail boxes are regularly filled with motions, appeals, depositions and other legal documents forwarded to me by no small number of attorneys involved in the civil lawsuit, unfortunately none which seem too familiar with the bankruptcy issues. A multi-million dollar judgment, (in addition to the restitution for the medical bills), has been handed down against me, so I don't see why the restitution for the medical bills shouldn't go to the people it REALLY belongs to. That would be "just," would it not? (Yes, I know, in the words of Scar, from The Lion King, "Life's not fair.")

I understand that it's not necessarily an attorney's job to do what is "fair," but what is best for his client. I understand it so well, (due to these proceedings), it sometimes sickens me, even on the rare occasion when I might be the person to benefit from certain legal tactics. However, I do wish our justice system was more "just" and I believe it would be "just" for the medical bills to be paid with the restitution that was ordered as compensation for them. Regardless of "right," or "wrong," I would like to know, (from someone who is familiar with bankruptcy law), if the bankruptcy court was aware of the restitution I am making for the medical bills being written off in the bankruptcy, would they garnish that restitution?

excon · Nov 9, 2008, 09:18 AM

Hello again, Jane:

Couple things:

I'm having trouble understanding why you're VOLUNTARILY paying him, and then getting really pissed off when he doesn't spend it as you would like him to...

I'm having a REAL hard time with that one... Seems to me, that if you STOPPED paying, your problems would be solved...

But, not only do you keep in paying him when you don't have to, you want to cause him TROUBLE for not spending the money as you would like...

Yes, I'm having a hard time with that one too.

But, THEN, when he's SUING you, and you're not going to defend the suit, or appeal it, tops the list of things I'm having a hard time with. Seems to me again, that if you wanted to cause him trouble, THAT lawsuit is where to do it..

excon

JaneSmith54 · Nov 9, 2008, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Jane:

Couple things:

I'm having trouble understanding why you're VOLUNTARILY paying him, and then getting really pissed off when he doesn't spend it as you would like him to....

I'm having a REAL hard time with that one..... Seems to me, that if you STOPPED paying, your problems would be solved....

But, not only do you keep in paying him when you don't have to, you want to cause him TROUBLE for not spending the money as you would like...

Yes, I'm having a hard time with that one too.

But, THEN, when he's SUING you, and you're not gonna defend the suit, or appeal it, tops the list of things I"m having a hard time with. Seems to me again, that if you wanted to cause him trouble, THAT lawsuit is where to do it..

excon

I don't know if this will answer your confusion, but I'll try...

First of all, I don't feel the issue is, (as you appear to feel), that he isn't spending the money simply "as I want him to." I assume the judge assumed he would actually use the money to pay the medical bills for which the restitution was ordered, not spend it on a boat and other luxuries. I only recently found out that he wasn't paying the bills, but writing them off in a bankruptcy.

I paid, voluntarily, for many years, because I believed he was paying the medical bills I had caused him to incur, and it was the "right" thing to do. Since he's not paying the medical bills, (and due to some other actions on his part), I WOULD like to stop paying him, but I would like to reimburse the hospitals, doctors, etc. for the expenses I caused him to incur. It's unfair for them not be paid for their services, when I am willing to pay for the damage I caused. Hence, my question regarding whether my payments could go to the Trustee, for the creditors. (I guess I could ask the Trustee, directly, but my attorneys probably wouldn't like that.)

I DID defend the suit, (in which numerous distortions of the truth were told, and some evidence which I felt was pertinant, was not allowed), and I AM appealing it. Not only am I appealing it, but my attorneys have filed new lawsuits, including one for nullification of the judgment, based on the person possibly committing bankruptcy fraud. When he filed for bankruptcy, the civil suit that was pending, at the time, should have become the property of the estate, but he didn't list it. In fact, he swore under oath, when he added his signature to the bankruptcy papers, that he did not have any pending claims against anyone. (Keep in mind this was three days after asking for a court date for the civil claim.)

This is a very complicated situation, with numerous on-going appeals, motions and even new litigation, some of it filed on my behalf. You'd think with the number of attorneys I have, I could get a straight answer, but they aren't bankruptcy attorneys, and they are caught up in their own approaches.

The bottom line is, I can only tackle this elephant one bite at a time. For now, I would just like the people who provided medical services to this person to be reimbursed. I've been paying restitution for these bills, and I would like to see them paid.

God forbid I should just stop paying... the judge in the appeal would probably allow that I had stopped paying to be introduced into evidence, but not allow that the person hadn't been paying the bills to be introduced.

Just call me...

Jaded Jane

excon · Nov 9, 2008, 11:09 AM

Hello again, Jaded:

I'm a little burned myself.

Sounds as though you want to do the right thing. I thought, earlier, doing that would compromise your legal standing... I see now that it won't. Therefore, I don't see any reason why you don't start paying the hospital and/or the medical practitioners directly.

I wouldn't know how to go about that, however. I suppose a conversation with the trustee would be in order.

Given that you have more control over how the money is spent than I previously understood, your input into the direction of your "restitution" IS reasonable.

I would only suggest that in future conversations about this payment, that you not call it restitution, because it really isn't. That's a legal term, under which your obligations, and/or refusal to adhere to them, are a great deal more severe than simply not paying an elective payment, which this really is. Besides it confuses people like me.

excon