[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

[ZehnBoat]

View attachment 1243688

I think 2 of these would apply to him

i would imagine it would be difficult for someone to prove someone acted in bad faith
i think it would be easier to swallow the idea that "phil is just retarded and messed up"

 

[actually]

i would imagine it would be difficult for someone to prove someone acted in bad faith
i think it would be easier to swallow the idea that "phil is just exceptional and messed up"

The combination of "business expenses" that just happen to work out such that he ends up below the Chapter 7 income threshold and the fact that he has not been able to enumerate them is not just "I messed up". I agree that it's harder to prove bad faith, but this isn't just forgetting to check a box saying you have a cat.

 

[Sir Wesley Tailpipe]

The combination of "business expenses" that just happen to work out such that he ends up below the Chapter 7 income threshold and the fact that he has not been able to enumerate them is not just "I messed up". I agree that it's harder to prove bad faith, but this isn't just forgetting to check a box saying you have a cat.

They don’t need concrete proof of bad faith, just enough indicators of it, which they definitely have. Phil gave the trustee the following indicators of bad faith:

1. Inaccurate address. Phil omitted the unit number of his condo on a court document! He then proceeded to dance around the answer in his 341 hearing.

2. Oddly perfect expense amounts, but not a single statement or receipt to back them up.

3. Outdated home valuation estimate that just happens to put him into the Homestead Exemption range.

4. Offering to answer the CitiBank troll’s question “behind the scenes” during his 341.

5. Evasive non-answers during the 341, like explaining what PayPal is when asked about his accounts there.

6. Not declaring all of his assets and accounts. He only declared one PayPal account, when he has at least one more.


Add all that up, and the likelihood of anything being done to give him a break declines greatly. Even if he was honest, but just not very smart, all those issues would be enough to fuck him deep and hard.

 

[James Smith]

The combination of "business expenses" that just happen to work out such that he ends up below the Chapter 7 income threshold and the fact that he has not been able to enumerate them is not just "I messed up".

To be fair maybe he has itemized them. I don't know one way or the other. I wouldn't be surprised if it was non-public information.

 

[DiabeticSP]

I really hope when they auction his shit off during the WAkondo takeover it ends up on a list for auction someplace.

I'm dying to know how many Keurigs and megaman blankets and other tat they take from him.

 

[actually]

To be fair maybe he has itemized them. I don't know one way or the other. I wouldn't be surprised if it was non-public information.

Based on the 341, it didn't seem like he had. Otherwise, I would imagine Nancy would have had questions. But maybe she figured they were bullshit.

 

[Martys_not_smarty]

Is there a way that the thread can have some sort of special alert to it when we finally get a ruling as opposed to what the pigroach thinks we do which is click refresh over and over?

 

[DiabeticSP]

Based on the 341, it didn't seem like he had. Otherwise, I would imagine Nancy would have had questions. But maybe she figured they were bullshit.

Might not have because this was a no asset case. So he'd just like X amount of Y. No reason for a asset list if he doesnt have any.

You could demand a list of what he's claiming but even if he was hiding assets he'd just leave them off.

Now that its an asset case he might need to file more shit for Nancy but I don't think that requests from the trustee get filed (like paypal accounts/etc which never showed on the docket).

 

[ZehnBoat]

4. Offering to answer the CitiBank troll’s question “behind the scenes” during his 341.

i want this to be the thing that gets phil in trouble, but i have a feeling it wont matter

it's one thing to not know an answer
but it's another to say on record "i'll answer when we're not being recorded"

but then again, if that is what gets his ass in hot water, fucking great
great for once his need to hide and obfuscate shit gets him in trouble

 

[PieceofShet]

Is there a way that the thread can have some sort of special alert to it when we finally get a ruling as opposed to what the pigroach thinks we do which is click refresh over and over?

I think darkdave has an auto alert on his twitter whenever there is an update.

 

[N0thingICanDo]

They don’t need concrete proof of bad faith, just enough indicators of it, which they definitely have. Phil gave the trustee the following indicators of bad faith:

1. Inaccurate address. Phil omitted the unit number of his condo on a court document! He then proceeded to dance around the answer in his 341 hearing.

2. Oddly perfect expense amounts, but not a single statement or receipt to back them up.

3. Outdated home valuation estimate that just happens to put him into the Homestead Exemption range.

4. Offering to answer the CitiBank troll’s question “behind the scenes” during his 341.

5. Evasive non-answers during the 341, like explaining what PayPal is when asked about his accounts there.

6. Not declaring all of his assets and accounts. He only declared one PayPal account, when he has at least one more.


Add all that up, and the likelihood of anything being done to give him a break declines greatly. Even if he was honest, but just not very smart, all those issues would be enough to fuck him deep and hard.

You forgot :

1. $5000 business expense per month

2. Declared to have no pet in the household even though he has 2, a cat and a horse

3. That his Nintendo portable console is purchased by him, instead of gifted by a dumb paypig

 

[eggsandwich]

i want this to be the thing that gets phil in trouble, but i have a feeling it wont matter

it's one thing to not know an answer
but it's another to say on record "i'll answer when we're not being recorded"

I'm curious what his lawyer was thinking when Phil said that line. "OMG, STFU, what's this guy problem! I should've charge way more than $1,200 for this idiot"..... And if I was that Citi guy, I would definitely ask, "I'm sorry, what did you just said? Could you repeat that couple more times?"

I wonder if Phil could've stay completely silent during that 341 meeting. In most court case, lawyer did all the talking but then this wasn't a court case....
I think Phil would've been 100% better off STFU and let his lawyer did all the talking.

 

[Sir Wesley Tailpipe]

"Your Honor, allow me to present Exhibit A, heretofore known as 'The Vest', my newfound totem that allows me to summon endless funds. I am now able to repay all my creditors."

It’s not that the Polish Potato lacks the ability to pay his debts, it’s that he lacks the inclination. He’s trying to use bankruptcy as a “Get out of jail free!” card.

 

[ZehnBoat]

I'm curious what his lawyer was thinking when Phil said that line. "OMG, STFU, what's this guy problem! I should've charge way more than $1,200 for this idiot".....

she was thinking "thanks for the money dummy"

 

[AnOminous]

Is there a way that the thread can have some sort of special alert to it when we finally get a ruling as opposed to what the pigroach thinks we do which is click refresh over and over?

Every federal court has an rss.

https://ecf.wawb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rss_outside.pl

I know it's like telling people it's written in cuneiform on clay tablets or some shit but it exists and it works.

 

[Sparkletor 2.0]

I'm curious what his lawyer was thinking when Phil said that line. "OMG, STFU, what's this guy problem! I should've charge way more than $1,200 for this idiot"..... And if I was that Citi guy, I would definitely ask, "I'm sorry, what did you just said? Could you repeat that couple more times?"

I wonder if Phil could've stay completely silent during that 341 meeting. In most court case, lawyer did all the talking but then this wasn't a court case....
I think Phil would've been 100% better off STFU and let his lawyer did all the talking.

I was under the impression that Phil was obligated to answer the questions himself.

When the trustee asked why he had no personal electronics, his lawyer admitted she was the one who "lumped everything together". I suppose that is her fault for not wanting to do the extra work to separate his assets.

I think the court wanted Phil to swear under oath that his filing was truthful and accurate. If his lawyer said, "I just wrote down what Phil told me," it becomes a problem of figuring out who screwed up. Did Phil really tell her his business cost $9000 to operate in July, or did she fudge the numbers to try to get him a better deal? They want to hear from Phil himself that his claims of income and expenses are true. That way if they find any discrepancies they know to come after Phil instead of saying his lawyer screwed up and have to do it all over with a competent attorney.

 

[Sir Wesley Tailpipe]

I was under the impression that Phil was obligated to answer the questions himself.

When the trustee asked why he had no personal electronics, his lawyer admitted she was the one who "lumped everything together". I suppose that is her fault for not wanting to do the extra work to separate his assets.

I think the court wanted Phil to swear under oath that his filing was truthful and accurate. If his lawyer said, "I just wrote down what Phil told me," it becomes a problem of figuring out who screwed up. Did Phil really tell her his business cost $9000 to operate in July, or did she fudge the numbers to try to get him a better deal? They want to hear from Phil himself that his claims of income and expenses are true. That way if they find any discrepancies they know to come after Phil instead of saying his lawyer screwed up and have to do it all over with a competent attorney.

His lawyer isn’t incompetent, she’s just a low-end bankruptcy mill lawyer. She’s basically there to help out the people who have a basic, honest case and deals with a high volume of clients that she only needs to be there for the filing and 341 for.

You would ‘t say a GP is incompetent because they aren’t a neurosurgeon.

You need something out of a John Grisham novel to deal with the Polish Potato and his bullshit.

 

[Iron Hamster]

They don’t need concrete proof of bad faith, just enough indicators of it, which they definitely have. Phil gave the trustee the following indicators of bad faith:

1. Inaccurate address. Phil omitted the unit number of his condo on a court document! He then proceeded to dance around the answer in his 341 hearing.

2. Oddly perfect expense amounts, but not a single statement or receipt to back them up.

3. Outdated home valuation estimate that just happens to put him into the Homestead Exemption range.

4. Offering to answer the CitiBank troll’s question “behind the scenes” during his 341.

5. Evasive non-answers during the 341, like explaining what PayPal is when asked about his accounts there.

6. Not declaring all of his assets and accounts. He only declared one PayPal account, when he has at least one more.


Add all that up, and the likelihood of anything being done to give him a break declines greatly. Even if he was honest, but just not very smart, all those issues would be enough to fuck him deep and hard.

You forgot :

1. $5000 business expense per month

2. Declared to have no pet in the household even though he has 2, a cat and a horse

3. That his Nintendo portable console is purchased by him, instead of gifted by a dumb paypig

View attachment 1244213

Also the brushing off of streamlabs like it was nothing.

 

[Tumbo]

Also the brushing off of streamlabs like it was nothing.

I'm convinced Dave is somekind of Lizard Person anyone else in his position would be sweating bullets. however as the old saying goes never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.

 

[AnOminous]

I was under the impression that Phil was obligated to answer the questions himself.

When the trustee asked why he had no personal electronics, his lawyer admitted she was the one who "lumped everything together". I suppose that is her fault for not wanting to do the extra work to separate his assets.

He was, and she actually went well above what she was paid to do by interposing utter bullshit and doing stuff that, frankly, I'm not even sure she was allowed to do at a 341 meeting. That isn't a court hearing and he's just supposed to answer normal questions (which were being asked) without a bunch of bullshit.

Throw in the "Citibank" troll though and this was nothing like a 341 meeting, which I should emphasize is not a "hearing." There isn't a judge there. It isn't supposed to go on that long. Shit like that isn't supposed to happen.