Though the legal authorities cited by Buckeye make reference to the possibility that an intentional undervaluation of an asset could constitute a concealment, none impose the sanction requested by Buckeye of a forfeiture of an exemption to which Debtors are otherwise entitled regarding disclosed but undervalued assets. Under such circumstances, this Court agrees with the Bankruptcy Court and the holding in In re McVay, 345 B.R. 846 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2006) that the remedy, if any, for an asset originally disclosed but allegedly undervalued is to seek a denial of Debtors' discharge, which apparently Buckeye has also done in filing an Adversary Proceeding. In the Adversary Proceeding, according to the Bankruptcy Court, Buckeye complains that Debtors should be denied a discharge on the grounds that Debtors committed fraudulent acts and concealed property by failing to disclose or accurately describe assets.

Id. (citing In re Mc Vay, 345 B.R. 846, 849 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 2006). "The reality is that mistakes do occur." Id.

However, "the existence of an inaccuracy in a debtor's schedules will not, standing alone, warrant any adverse action so long as the inaccuracy is inadvertent." Id. (citing In re McVay, 345 B.R. 846, 849 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 2006). "The reality is that mistakes do occur."

Yet, the existence of an inaccuracy in a debtor's schedules will not, standing alone, warrant any adverse action so long as the inaccuracy is inadvertent. In re McVay, 345 B.R. 846, 849 (Bankr. N.D.Ohio 2006). The reality is that mistakes do occur.

They can miss points that are obvious to others and may be obvious to them in retrospect or after some explanation. Ford v. Gillman (In re Ford), 336 B.R. 813 (10th Cir. B.A.P. 2006); In re McVay, 345 B.R. 846 (Bankr. N. D. Ohio 2006); Sheehan v. Lincoln Nat. Life, 257 B.R. 449 (N. D. W. Va. 2001). The debtor appears to have been afflicted with this lack of understanding.

As this Court has previously observed: when in doubt, disclose. In re McVay, 345 B.R. 846, 850 (Bankr. N.D.Ohio 2006); United States Trustee v. Halishak (In re Halishak), 337 B.R. 620, 630 (Bankr. N.D.Ohio 2005).

Although not in the context of paragraphs (a)(2) or (a)(4), the issue of scienter and fraud regarding the Debtors' failure to list the workers' compensation claim was previously addressed, by this Court, in the context of the Trustee's Motion to Strike Amended Schedules B and C and an Objection to Debtors' Claim of Exemptions. In re McVay, 345 B.R. 846 (Bankr. N.D.Ohio 2006). In denying the Trustee's request for relief, the Court made these findings: first, the Court found the fact that the Debtors failed to disclose the workers' compensation settlement but listed other exempted items troubling.