1991) and In re Brones, Bankr. Case No. 90-19489-PAC (Order entered February 23, 1993). 14 . It is imperative, therefore, that a plan and schedules contain sufficient information, including a correct creditor name and address, in order to allow proper processing of these payments by the Chapter 13 Trustee. 15 . When a proof of claim has been timely filed, this Court has also held that distributions should be made according to the terms of a confirmed plan. See, Fleet Real Estate Funding Corp. v. Fewell, Adv.Pro. No. 92-1579-SBB (Order entered January 14, 1993) (timely filed proof of claim which exceeds amount set forth in the confirmed plan is paid according to the plan and lien for balance survives). But see, In re Randell, Bankr. Case No. 90-13733-SBB (Order entered August 5, 1992) (<HOLDING>). 16 . In re Hausladen, 146 B.R. 557
holding that res judicata did not bar debtors objection to creditors proof of claim where the plan expressly reserved the general right to assert postconfirmation objections to claims holding that a plan must be amended to provide for payment of a priority tax claim proof of which was timely filed postconfirmation to conform with 11 usc  1322a2 holding that fail ure to pay postconfirmation taxes claimed by irs pursuant to 11 usc  1305 and provided for under terms of plan was cause for dismissal holding that a confirmed chapter 13 plan is binding on all parties under 11 usc  1327a however the plan may be modified pursuant to 11 usc  1329 holding that a plan under chapter 13 although confirmed was invalid because it failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of 11 usc  1322a2 requiring full payment of all claims entitled to priority