[26-Mar-2020] Philip's 341 Creditor Meeting - When what should be 5 minutes becomes an eternity.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The really funny part out of all of it is that the trustee could have just rejected his bid for bankruptcy on the spot, but she decided to investigate because of how funky the paperwork was.

Just think about that for a minute.

Not only was it apparent he had enough money to pay his fucking bills from the rough numbers, he made it look so obvious that he’s hiding something that the trustee is going to dig to see how many bodies she finds.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, MadameMidlifeCrisis, Wurstbrot and 12 others
Schrödinger's Kat said:
Whether they were gifted to him, or he bought them, or someone else bought them, they are just assets and right now they all belong to Nancy. There must have been some angle that Nancy was trying to play with the "you bought them personally?" question. But I can't say for sure what it is. Maybe she's establishing that these are not business expenses.

He doesn't really have "business assets", everything that belongs to the business also belongs to Phil because he is a sole proprietorship. His business is part of the bankruptcy, so his business isn't exempt from anything. He's probably claiming the "tools of the trade" exemption, which allows him to keep certain shit he uses to make money. This exemption is $10,000, so why Phil only claimed $1,500 when he clearly owns more than that is exceptional. He should have claimed the full value, because if Nancy decides his shit is worth more than he exempted on his form, it gets liquidated.
Click to expand...
Since his business didnt "exist" before 2017, anything he owned/used before then is personal property, unless he went through the legal channels to transfer ownership, which phil 100% did not do. EDIT: also, unless he can prove that the "assets" bought after that date are owned by the business, they'll be considered personal assets in collections. If they go through with the bankruptcy they will absolutely do a run though of his property noting all assets and their ownership first. Phil cant pigroach out of that one.

He really is backed into a corner, he doesnt realize it because of his raging narcissism and general stupidity.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, MadameMidlifeCrisis, detractorzer0 and 25 others
DNA_JACKED said:
Since his business didnt "exist" before 2017, anything he owned/used before then is personal property, unless he went through the legal channels to transfer ownership, which phil 100% did not do. EDIT: also, unless he can prove that the "assets" bought after that date are owned by the business, they'll be considered personal assets in collections. If they go through with the bankruptcy they will absolutely do a run though of his property noting all assets and their ownership first. Phil cant pigroach out of that one.

He really is backed into a corner, he doesnt realize it because of his raging narcissism and general stupidity.
Click to expand...

So it's a personal bankruptcy (Nancy said this quite firmly). Phil, rather than making an LLC, threw down $200 to create a sole proprietorship. So everything his 'business' owns, he owns as well, so there's a complete blurring of the lines as to what is exclusively business-related and what is used personal. Which means just about everything in his manchild mansion can go away.

Then, he chose to only claim about $1500 in business assets i.e. shit he absolutely needs to keep making money. The cap on this is actually $10k. In those $1500, Paul claimed shit like a PS Vita, an Xbox 360, a Wii U. To my knowledge the last time he used any of these was when he was save scumming his way through Donkey Kong Country 1-3 on the Wii U sometime last year.

Damn Phil, could have at least thrown Khat in there. Most non-professional horses are below the $10k mark. We know you two don't love each other and underwear time is once a year at best. She's probably the most non-personal asset in that house.

Edit: small correction a few post below
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Ivan Shatov, spiritofamermaid, ((CH3)2Hg) and 13 others
Business related. I still have it.
1585849633840.png
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Winner
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, MadameMidlifeCrisis, detractorzer0 and 43 others
the khat quaffer said:
So it's a personal bankruptcy (Nancy said this quite firmly). Phil, rather than making an LLC, threw down $200 to create a sole proprietorship. So everything his 'business' owns, he owns as well, so there's a complete blurring of the lines as to what is exclusively business-related and what is used personal. Which means just about everything in his manchild mansion can go away.

Then, he chose to only claim about $1500 in business assets i.e. shit he absolutely needs to keep making money. The cap on this is actually $10k. In those $1500, Paul claimed shit like a PS Vita, an Xbox 360, a Wii U. To my knowledge the last time he used any of these was when he was save scumming his way through Donkey Kong Country 1-3 on the Wii U sometime last year.

Damn Phil, could have at least thrown Khat in there. Most non-professional horses are below the $10k mark. We know you two don't love each other and underwear time is once a year at best. She's probably the most non-personal asset in that house.
Click to expand...

The $1500 of "business assets" is actually claimed under the exemption for "other personal property" which is limited to $3k. When he added the PayPal account he exceeded this limit so about $100 of the PayPal isn't even exempt.

If he could have up to $10k to protect his toys why isn't he using it? My guess: "content creator" isn't a trade under the law and therefore he doesn't qualify for a tools of the trade exemption at all.

His toys might have counted as household goods which I believe he still had plenty of exemption left to claim. Is it possible Phil thought they would be safer claimed specifically as business assets instead of normal personal belongings and that's why he left electronics blank? If so he better hope he isn't held to his original exemption claims at liquidation and can adjust the exemptions to more closely match reality.

Just to repeat: business assets being claimed as personal property.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Ivan Shatov, spiritofamermaid, MadameMidlifeCrisis and 8 others
Kermit the Frog said:
I'm sure if the bankruptcy takes a bad turn for Phil, we'll get an EMERGENCY stream where he violently shakes in his chair and goes on a mega rant about detractors doing this to him.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm pretty excited about that also. Shouldn't be much longer...
 
  • Agree
Reactions: NursezillaX
DiabeticSP said:
I do think 'trade goods' is more things like mechanics toolsets, which are required to do an actual trade.

Playing video games isnt a trade.
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to accept his consoles, computers and tvs as tools of the trade and I think the law should too. It *is* an occupation and one Dark (barely) does.

But his forms are all over the place and disingenuous so fuck em
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, wahkando, My Knee is Growing and 8 others
DiabeticSP said:
I do think 'trade goods' is more things like mechanics toolsets, which are required to do an actual trade.

Playing video games isnt a trade.
Click to expand...
The Washington "tools of the trade" exemption is $10,000 per 6.15.050(1)(e)(iii):
1. ... the following personal property is exempt from execution:
(e) To each qualified individual:
(iii) To any other individual, the tools and instruments and materials used to carry on his or her trade for the support of himself or herself or family, not to exceed ten thousand dollars in value.

It's fairly broad. Regardless of whether DSP's toys count as trade tools, his filing's "business assets" line instead cites 6.15.050(1)(d)(ii), which exempts up to $3,000 of property and is also used to claim his bank accounts (up to $1,500). I've seen people saying that adding his Paypal account(s) put him over the $1,500 cash limit, which means he has only $1,500 remaining for all his consoles.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, MadameMidlifeCrisis, Mesh Gear Fox and 6 others
TankMelee said:
The Washington "tools of the trade" exemption is $10,000 per 6.15.050(1)(e)(iii):
1. ... the following personal property is exempt from execution:
(e) To each qualified individual:
(iii) To any other individual, the tools and instruments and materials used to carry on his or her trade for the support of himself or herself or family, not to exceed ten thousand dollars in value.

It's fairly broad. Regardless of whether DSP's toys count as trade tools, his filing's "business assets" line instead cites 6.15.050(1)(d)(ii), which exempts up to $3,000 of property and is also used to claim his bank accounts (up to $1,500). I've seen people saying that adding his Paypal account(s) put him over the $1,500 cash limit, which means he has only $1,500 remaining for all his consoles.
Click to expand...

I see what he's doing now, trying to claim EVERYTHING under that, is worth the magical exemption amount of $1,500, exactly, so he can keep it

seems to be a trend on his forms

what a scumbag
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, MadameMidlifeCrisis, draculapenis and 3 others
tzgnilki said:
I see what he's doing now, trying to claim EVERYTHING under that, is worth the magical exemption amount of $1,500, exactly, so he can keep it

seems to be a trend on his forms

what a scumbag
Click to expand...
Let's be honest here. I don't think Phil was smart enough to come up with this on his own. I'm pretty sure Rochelle had a hand in telling him how he could potentially get to keep all his shit.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: The Spice boi, spiritofamermaid, MadameMidlifeCrisis and 12 others
tzgnilki said:
I see what he's doing now, trying to claim EVERYTHING under that, is worth the magical exemption amount of $1,500, exactly, so he can keep it

seems to be a trend on his forms

what a scumbag
Click to expand...
Why not put them in the category with the bigger exemption? A lot of people interpret things on DSP's filings and in the call like they were done with the intent to game the system, but honestly I think a lot of it is just DSP's stupidity and his lawyer's expedited filing. The $1,500 exemption is like something of a miscellaneous category, where after clothing, furnishings, appliances, and some other protections, you're allowed $1,500 of cash and $1,500 of whatever else of value you claim. Knowing DSP, even if Sheffield asked about the value of his streaming equipment, he probably downplayed their value as "next to nothing" (which is consistent with how he describes his Youtube income) and she just checked the boxes like the average client with no really valuable goods.
 
  • Like
  • Optimistic
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, wahkando, draculapenis and 1 other person
ReentryPhantom said:
Let's be honest here. I don't think Phil was smart enough to come up with this on his own. I'm pretty sure Rochelle had a hand in telling him how he could potentially get to keep all his shit.
Click to expand...
She'd be derelict in her professional duties if she didn't explain it to him; part of her job is to help him report and categorize his stuff in the way that's most beneficial to him. That doesn't give him a pass for lying to her about how much stuff he has or its value, of course; in the end, his forms can only be as accurate as he is willing to be honest. It doesn't sound like he's been very honest with his lawyer, which is honestly just about the stupidest move anyone could possibly take. If you're in the position of needing a lawyer, they can't help you very effectively if you're not honest with them.

It does leave the question of why, if a $10k exemption for "tools of the trade" could've been claimed, they didn't try to claim it.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Mesh Gear Fox, Jungle_Bananas and 4 others
The way Phil explains things to normies is the biggest problem. It got him in trouble with his college professor/tax preparer/CPA/tax attorney. Now it's going to get him in trouble with the Bankruptcy attorney.

He has to obsificate everything, even to people he should be straight forward with.

He can't even be straight forward under oath in a hearing.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, wahkando, My Knee is Growing and 8 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back