[16-Jan-2020] DarksydePhil is filing for bankruptcy (general thread) - and has officially done so on January 31 2020, meaning a lot of his finances have become public

[harbinger]

Remember when you posted these pityful sad-face pictures of yourself after Leanna escaped your goutsphere?

I’m still convinced these were his sexy photos for Kat when he was wooing her to WA.

I'm gonna stop you right there, because NOBODY is spending five grand a month making Youtube videos and you're insane if you think that's a standard business expense. Even people who keep their setups up to date and buy all the major gaming titles every month wouldn't spend anywhere near 5k.

I could see someone like Pewdiepie spending at least $5k a month. He has two editors working on his videos and it wouldn’t surprise me if he was paying them a salary.

 

[Wing Zero]

I could see someone like Pewdiepie spending at least $5k a month. He has two editors working on his videos and it wouldn’t surprise me if he was paying them a salary.

Okay i'll give you that one, but that's an obvious outlier that doesn't represent the average content creator's expenses, and it sure as hell doesn't represent Phil's.

 

[Iron Hamster]

Quarterpounder allegedly hired one of pewdiepie's guys while he was on hiatus because the guy needed a paycheck.

 

[behind_the_scenes_begging]

would the Home Owner Association for the WA property automatically be alerted if one of its tenants (/clients?) instigates bankruptcy proceedings? They don't seem to be a party to the matter. Phil wouldn't be in debt to them per se but he would have an obligation to them, which a bankruptcy decision might mean he gets to avoid. it seems like they should have a stake in things, otherwise Phil's neighbours could effectively be left having to pay for a bankrupt tenant's fees.

 

[actually]

would the Home Owner Association for the WA property automatically be alerted if one of its tenants (/clients?) instigates bankruptcy proceedings? They don't seem to be a party to the matter. Phil wouldn't be in debt to them per se but he would have an obligation to them, which a bankruptcy decision might mean he gets to avoid. it seems like they should have a stake in things, otherwise Phil's neighbours could effectively be left having to pay for a bankrupt tenant's fees.

He's been paying the WAKhando stuff. It's the CT condo he ditched.

 

[ProvenWrong]

I'm replying to the guy who asked this question in the main DSP thread. By family support I don't think to means his family supporting him I believe it is for him supporting a family. Ex: the child support it mentions. Which he doesn't owe any.

 

[behind_the_scenes_begging]

He's been paying the WAKhando stuff. It's the CT condo he ditched.

Yes but if he is declared bankrupt, by that time he will have incurred further debts from the WAKhando association, possibly several months worth of fees which the bankruptcy decision will mean he can avoid paying, or at least they are debts like anyone else's. It would be pretty unfair if his neighbours, having listened to him snort and rant over the years essentially ended up having to asborb his fees. If he sees the bankruptcy decision coming he might also just stop paying the WA fees as he did the CT. Actually that's exactly the kind of thing he would do. If I were a member of his association I'd like to know another member had bankruptcy proceedings on foot.

 

[actually]

Yes but if he is declared bankrupt, by that time he will have incurred further debts from the WAKhando association, possibly several months worth of fees which the bankruptcy decision will mean he can avoid paying, or at least they are debts like anyone else's. It would be pretty unfair if his neighbours, having listened to him snort and rant over the years essentially ended up having to asborb his fees. If he sees the bankruptcy decision coming he might also just stop paying the WA fees as he did the CT. Actually that's exactly the kind of thing he would do. If I were a member of his association I'd like to know another member had bankruptcy proceedings on foot.

That's not how the bankruptcy works. He doesn't have to pay his unsecured debt (like credit cards). He chose to stop paying the CT condo mortgage, although he actually still has to pay the condo fees until it's not in his name.

If he stopped paying on the WA condo, the mortgage holder would foreclose it as well, and he would be super-fucked. If he stopped paying the condo/HOA fees, the HOA would put a lien on the house, and they could probably force a sale of the condo if it went long enough.

 

[Schrödinger's Kat]

although he actually still has to pay the condo fees until it's not in his name.

Here's an interesting read. It says that HOA dues prior to filing Chapter 7 are discharge-able, but after the filing date they are not, until the home has completed foreclosure.

That means Phil potentially did not pay the CT kahndo dues between April 2019 and January 2020, and just started paying again in February to avoid getting sued. But if he did that, they should have been listed as a creditor in his filing. Or maybe he just forgot to list them which will screw him later...

Can I Discharge HOA Dues in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy?

If you let go of your property in Chapter 7 bankruptcy, you can discharge all HOA fees up to the filing date. You’ll be responsible for any HOA fees that accrue after the bankruptcy filing and before title changes to a new owner.

www.nolo.com

 

[actually]

Here's an interesting read.

That's quite interesting indeed. Might explain why he was "blindsided" by the HOA fees. May have thought he would get to just stop paying them completely.

 

[Madmartigan]

I took the time to watch the video regarding how meetings of creditors are conducted that was posted in the OP.
Am I correct to assume that it's likely that very little of interest will come out of the meeting next week? It seems like a lot of people have high hopes of something juicy coming out of said meeting, but after watching that video my expectations are very low.
It's mentioned at the end of the video that several of those meetings occur every hour, and that due to the lack of time any creditors in attendance would only be allowed to ask a few basic questions, stressing that it's not to become a deposition.
To those of you that have knowledge of this stuff, is there anything of interest in particular that you think may come out of this meeting?
@actually @SoapQueen1 I'd be interested in your thoughts about this.
To me it just kinda sounds like a confirmation of stuff we've already seen on the documents, and little else.

 

[King Daddy Telomerase]

Phil bitched about having to pay his CT khando dues throughout 2019, which you can check on pigpiggo.

 

[actually]

I took the time to watch the video regarding how meetings of creditors are conducted that was posted in the OP.
Am I correct to assume that it's likely that very little of interest will come out of the meeting next week? It seems like a lot of people have high hopes of something juicy coming out of said meeting, but after watching that video my expectations are very low.
It's mentioned at the end of the video that several of those meetings occur every hour, and that due to the lack of time any creditors in attendance would only be allowed to ask a few basic questions, stressing that it's not to become a deposition.
To those of you that have knowledge of this stuff, is there anything of interest in particular that you think may come out of this meeting?
@actually @SoapQueen1 I'd be interested in your thoughts about this.
To me it just kinda sounds like a confirmation of stuff we've already seen on the documents, and little else.

Most likely, there won't be a lot of interesting documents from the hearing itself. The audio could be interesting if he gets questioned about any of the stuff in his filing or if a representative for a creditor is there to ask questions / challenge his filing. Otherwise, I think we're looking for filings made by interested parties after the meeting or something from the trustee.

 

[AnOminous]

I took the time to watch the video regarding how meetings of creditors are conducted that was posted in the OP.
Am I correct to assume that it's likely that very little of interest will come out of the meeting next week? It seems like a lot of people have high hopes of something juicy coming out of said meeting, but after watching that video my expectations are very low.
It's mentioned at the end of the video that several of those meetings occur every hour, and that due to the lack of time any creditors in attendance would only be allowed to ask a few basic questions, stressing that it's not to become a deposition.
To those of you that have knowledge of this stuff, is there anything of interest in particular that you think may come out of this meeting?
@actually @SoapQueen1 I'd be interested in your thoughts about this.
To me it just kinda sounds like a confirmation of stuff we've already seen on the documents, and little else.

I just hope autists don't do something utterly idiotic that gives Phil a reason to try to have some kind of protective order for hearings where shit might actually happen.

 

[Richard Harrow]

I just hope autists don't do something utterly idiotic that gives Phil a reason to try to have some kind of protective order for hearings where shit might actually happen.

This wouldn't shock me one bit. I know there's a group of exceptionals waiting for Dave's big moment in the sun, waiting to pounce with their phone-footage expecting to get 'Kiwi Street-Cred' when all is said and done. It's why we can't have nice things. We had a rule in the military which is universally applicable: "There's always one."

 

[Dizzyuntildeath]

Question. How exactly is his business Burnell Productions save but not the private person Phill Burnell? Both share the house, electronics, games, electric and water, the business is in fact just one person which is Phil. The entire profit of Burnell Productions goes into his wallet, he's not employed, but the boss and only workforce. So wouldn't his business go bankrupt if the said business can't generate enough money to liquidate the debts?

Or this is some mishmash wibble wobble law thing the common folks don't really need to understand, they don't understand it either. Or it's just me, that happens quite often.

Rainbow hands for his business getting obliterated.

Edit. @Salubrious I hope the hearing and audio recording brings some light into the dark. Recently he lies about the most miniscule facts. Now he's wired to directly contradict himself in absolutes without gray areas. This fucker is so damn confusing and unreliable.

I do not have a business degree, but I was raised in a mom and pop hardware store, and by a bank manager, but here is some insight: his business is NOT safe. He is an independent contractor. He has a name he operates under, but I don't recall him actually having a business license. Because he did not form an LLC and subsequently hire himself, he does not get the same protection a genuine business would. It may be different in the states, but because he is just some small business operator, I believe that in the eyes of the law and the government, Phil Burnell and Burnell Productions (he really brainstormed that one) are the same entity. What he owns is his property, of which a portion is used for completing his contracts. But it's all in his name, if he had an LLC, the computer, consoles, basically his whole office setup would belong to Burnell Productions, not Phil the person, as such, a lot of the stuff he swears is protected is actually fair game. The onus is on him to prove that these items are for his business. In business talk, that usually means receipts, write off history, the like. He does not strike me as a book keeper, and I imagine he has no ledgers where he records his income. So basically, Phil taking the money is essentially taking the cash in the register and pocketing it, it's technically his, since he isn't a business entity, as far as I can tell, but by not reinvesting it, he is harming his ability to do further business (spend money to make money), in essence, he is robbing himself. And then nailing his balls to the wall if, God forbid, he get audited, he's gotta sit there and prove every expense he has ever claimed and he likely has no paper trail to support it. Lord help him if they look into it during this bankruptcy process. Now, I am not completely clear, but he may have accidentally done one thing right insofar as highering someone else to do his taxes for him. What I am unclear on is his language, a tax attorney is very different from an accountant. What he claims he pays to have his stuff filed is what an accounting firm usually charges small business operators. The taxes are dead easy, and the programs walk you through everything, from your name, right down to the last penny you made/spent, reductions, operating expenses, multiple sources of income, it's all in there, and for having four sources of income, it's still pretty straightforward. It could have been ever so slightly more complicated if he had rented out the CT condo and pulled in money there, but apparently throwing money into a burning pit was the better option for him. Anyways, when an accountant does your taxes, you're not really paying him to fill out the form, that's just a byproduct of the transaction, what you are really paying for is that in the case of an audit, the accounting firm will go to bat for you. I mean, within reason, it still ultimately falls on you to do the bare minimum and put your receipts in a fucking drawer. An accountant can help him ever so slightly here. An attorney will look at him, look at his book (or lack thereof), and say what the fuck do you realistically expect me to do about this? A bad, or unscrupulous attorney will still take the money and happily lose the case if he doesn't care to much about his win/loss ratio at the court level.

So, unless he has some amazing accountants, this man and his business is in danger being being stripped down to what the trustee feels two normal human beings can realistically live off of and not die, and most levels of government have very specific numbers of what that is. Maybe not die, but well, not thrive, anyway, you don't get rewarded for bankruptcy.

 

[tzgnilki]

I do not have a business degree, but I was raised in a mom and pop hardware store, and by a bank manager, but here is some insight: his business is NOT safe. He is an independent contractor. He has a name he operates under, but I don't recall him actually having a business license. Because he did not form an LLC and subsequently hire himself, he does not get the same protection a genuine business would. It may be different in the states, but because he is just some small business operator, I believe that in the eyes of the law and the government, Phil Burnell and Burnell Productions (he really brainstormed that one) are the same entity. What he owns is his property, of which a portion is used for completing his contracts. But it's all in his name, if he had an LLC, the computer, consoles, basically his whole office setup would belong to Burnell Productions, not Phil the person, as such, a lot of the stuff he swears is protected is actually fair game. The onus is on him to prove that these items are for his business. In business talk, that usually means receipts, write off history, the like. He does not strike me as a book keeper, and I imagine he has no ledgers where he records his income. So basically, Phil taking the money is essentially taking the cash in the register and pocketing it, it's technically his, since he isn't a business entity, as far as I can tell, but by not reinvesting it, he is harming his ability to do further business (spend money to make money), in essence, he is robbing himself. And then nailing his balls to the wall if, God forbid, he get audited, he's gotta sit there and prove every expense he has ever claimed and he likely has no paper trail to support it. Lord help him if they look into it during this bankruptcy process. Now, I am not completely clear, but he may have accidentally done one thing right insofar as highering someone else to do his taxes for him. What I am unclear on is his language, a tax attorney is very different from an accountant. What he claims he pays to have his stuff filed is what an accounting firm usually charges small business operators. The taxes are dead easy, and the programs walk you through everything, from your name, right down to the last penny you made/spent, reductions, operating expenses, multiple sources of income, it's all in there, and for having four sources of income, it's still pretty straightforward. It could have been ever so slightly more complicated if he had rented out the CT condo and pulled in money there, but apparently throwing money into a burning pit was the better option for him. Anyways, when an accountant does your taxes, you're not really paying him to fill out the form, that's just a byproduct of the transaction, what you are really paying for is that in the case of an audit, the accounting firm will go to bat for you. I mean, within reason, it still ultimately falls on you to do the bare minimum and put your receipts in a fucking drawer. An accountant can help him ever so slightly here. An attorney will look at him, look at his book (or lack thereof), and say what the fuck do you realistically expect me to do about this? A bad, or unscrupulous attorney will still take the money and happily lose the case if he doesn't care to much about his win/loss ratio at the court level.

So, unless he has some amazing accountants, this man and his business is in danger being being stripped down to what the trustee feels two normal human beings can realistically live off of and not die, and most levels of government have very specific numbers of what that is. Maybe not die, but well, not thrive, anyway, you don't get rewarded for bankruptcy.

if dsp gets audited, I only see him getting fined for bad book-keeping

 

[Dizzyuntildeath]

if dsp gets audited, I only see him getting fined for bad book-keeping

Business fines tend to be quite a bit higher than personal fines. If he's hurting to pay the $350 filing fee, a multiple thousand dollar fine would be very difficult for him to deal with.

 

[Madmartigan]

Most likely, there won't be a lot of interesting documents from the hearing itself. The audio could be interesting if he gets questioned about any of the stuff in his filing or if a representative for a creditor is there to ask questions / challenge his filing. Otherwise, I think we're looking for filings made by interested parties after the meeting or something from the trustee.

Sounds about right. I did a bit more research into these types of meetings, and there was one scenario that seemed possible and piqued my interest a bit.
A creditor could claim that his debts should be nondischargeable if they feel that he maintained his spending habits after a decline in income (basically meaning he racked up debt with no intentions of ever paying it off). I don't know what the odds of this happening are at this point, and don't want to get anyone's hopes up, but if nothing else that sure sounds like an accurate assessment of the situation.
It's no secret that he's had a decline in income, and that's information that I assume the creditors could get a hold of easily.
Phil won't be grilled about his spending habits at this upcoming meeting, but it's something that could happen at a later date.
Imagine if he did indeed spend tens of thousands of dollars on that fucking mobile game, and one of his creditors is able to uncover proof of that.

 

[James Smith]

This isn't guaranteed to be the only meeting before his bankruptcy forms are passed off to a judge. This meeting always happens. Any given creditor can set up additional, much more intensive meetings if the trustee agrees more information is needed to protect the integrity of the bankruptcy system.