July 23, 2018

Case Closed without Discharge Creates Big Problem for Chapter 7 Debtor

bankruptcy case closed without dischargeDo you have an order of discharge following the completion of your Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 case? If not, you may want to fix this problem now before it bites you later.

Every Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 debtor must attend two credit counseling classes. The first, called the pre-bankruptcy credit counseling course, is required before you can file. Your certificate of completion is your ticket in to the bankruptcy process.

Once you have an active case, however, you must attend a second course called a financial management course, obtain a certificate of completion and have your lawyer file that certificate with the clerk of bankruptcy court.

This financial management course offers tips about how to set up a household budget and how to avoid financial mistakes that resulted in your need to file for bankruptcy in the first place.

If your lawyer does not file this financial management course certificate of completion you will not be eligible for a bankruptcy discharge. Instead, your case will be closed without discharge.

Why is a discharge order so important? It represents a formal order from the bankruptcy judge that all debts which can be eliminated or adjusted have been so modified. This order is binding on all state and federal courts and if a creditor attempts to collect on a discharged debt, you can sue that creditor for damages in a contempt proceeding. [Read more…]

How Chapter 7 Can Help You Pay Your Non-dischargeable Student Loans

Bankruptcy Code 523(a)(8)In my last post, I argued that the current Bankruptcy Code standard for discharging student loans is unduly harsh and burdensome.   Currently student loan debt – and this includes private student loans, government backed student loans, parent incurred loans, and loans paid to schools that have closed down before the student received training or a degree – may not be discharged in bankruptcy unless the debtor can show “undue hardship.”

The courts have read undue hardship to mean some reason beyond the debtor’s control that would preclude repayment.   This usually means that there must be some medical reason that the debtor will not ever be able to return to work.  Underemployment is specifically not a reason to allow undue hardship.  As far as the courts are concerned, debtors who are healthy always have opportunities to increase their income so that they can pay their student loan debt, whether payment comes next year or in 20 years.

It seems oddly inconsistent for the Bankruptcy Code to allow debtors to discharge income tax debt solely based on its age ( income tax debt that is 3 or more years old may be discharged) but for all intents and purposes will not allow for the discharge of student loans despite the fact that:

  • student loans are typically incurred by 17 year olds with little understanding of what real world debt means
  • colleges and student loan lenders have less disclosure requirements than credit card lenders
  • loans remain non-dischargeable even if the school goes out of business and does not provide the education
  • parents who sign for loans have no recourse even though they did not get the benefit of the education
  • colleges have used the wide availability of government guaranteed loans to boost tuition costs at many times the rate of inflation
  • colleges bear no responsibility for offering courses of education that are unlikely to result in salaries sufficient to pay the loans

    Pages: 1 2

Inside the Mind of a Bankruptcy Lawyer – Should I File and if so, Why Should I Choose Your Firm?

There are dozens of lawyers out there who offer to prepare and file bankruptcy cases.  Some work in high volume “bankruptcy mill” firms that compete on price while others compete on experience, knowledge and service.  Usually the cost differential is a few hundred dollars, but when you are considering bankruptcy, every dollar counts – so why would you want a lawyer like me as opposed to a firm that would offer to represent you for a lower price?

I could offer a glib answer like “if you needed brain surgery, would you look for the cheapest surgeon on the one with the most experience and industry recognition” but that does not really answer the question.  Perhaps it would be helpful if you could look over my shoulder as I analyze a real life situation that came before me recently.

Earlier this month an email arrived from a couple who wanted information about bankruptcy.  The wife wrote that she was a stay at home mom raising 2 children and that her husband lost his job about a year ago, and recently started back to work at a lower paying job.  Their current household income is just under $50,000.  They own a house that is now worth less than what they paid for it – the house is worth about $200,000 – the first mortgage is $210,000 and the second mortgage is $35,000.  They own one older car outright and are financing a mini-van.  They have also incurred around $25,000 of credit card debt – most of which was used trying to keep the mortgage current.

Earlier this year they fell behind on both the first and second mortgage.  The first mortgage lender started foreclosure proceedings, but suspended foreclosure and offered to consider my potential clients for a mortgage modification.  They have been making modified payments for several months but when they called the lender to ask if they had been approved for a permanent modification, the account rep told them that their modification paperwork had not been approved but that their application had been sent to another department for a reconsideration.  News of this decision had not been provided to my prospective clients – the only reason they found out was from their call.  No one from the mysterious reconsideration division was available and their multiple calls have not been returned for over 2 weeks.

They decided to contact me because they are getting the sense that the mortgage company is unlikely to approve their modification and they want to be prepared for a possible foreclosure.  What are their options? [Read more…]

Forgotten Lawsuit Creates Big Problems for Prior Chapter 7 Client

Earlier this month I received a call from a Chapter 7 client that I had represented several years ago.  He is attempting to refinance his house and has discovered that a judgment creditor has a lien for several thousand dollars.  The creditor was listed on the case, but neither he no I knew that there was any judgment.

I directed him to visit the county courthouse and pull the file for this case.  He did and he reports that the return of service shows that his wife was served by a sheriff’s deputy.  His wife has no recollection of being served.  We did list the creditor on the bankruptcy petition but because we did not know that there was a judgment, we did not file a motion to avoid the judgment lien.  What can he do?

There are a number of lessons you can learn from this man’s experience.  First, you should always obtain copies of credit reports from all 3 credit bureaus prior to filing bankruptcy.   In Georgia, you can get a free credit report from each of the 3 main credit bureaus twice a year.  Online, you can go to annualcreditreport.com and download your reports.  Because credit reports obviously contain sensitive information the annualcreditreport.com system will ask several questions to identify yourself.  These are usually multiple choice questions – for example, the system may say “your credit report shows that you previously lived on one of the following streets: (a) Oak Street (b) Thompson Street (c) Ivers Road (d) none of the above.

If you are unable to answer these questions, the system will instruct you to mail away for your credit reports – here is a link to a page on my website with the credit report request letters.

Credit reports are helpful because they will usually show pending lawsuits as well as the names, address, account numbers and debt amounts for most of your creditors.  Obviously I can’t require all bankruptcy clients to bring me credit reports but it sure helps avoid “forgotten” creditors or judgments. [Read more…]

BAPCPA at 4 Years – Has It Solved Anything?

paperworkI have been representing debtors in bankruptcy cases filed in the Northern District of Georgia for over 20 years. Until the law changed in 2005, filing bankruptcy was a fairly straightforward process – often I would meet with a client, decide whether to file and select Chapter 7 or Chapter 13, collect information about creditors, develop a budget, then file that day.

Attorney’s fees and filing fees in those days were relatively low and relatively hassle free. Most Chapter 7 cases processed through to discharge, and Chapter 13 cases worked as long as the debtor remained employed and committed to making his case work.

Fast forward to October, 2005 – the time that the BAPCPA amendment to the Bankruptcy Code went into effect. The system became significantly more complicated. Clients were expected to gather page after page of documents, lawyers were charged with performing extensive budget calculations (the median income and means test).

Fees went up because both the attorney’s liability and the amount of work required increased greatly. And what is the end result? Many people with limited income and no hope of paying it back are filing Chapter 7. Others who would have fit into Chapter 7 sometimes do not qualify immediately and end up having to delay their filing for a few months. Folks with some capacity to pay end up in Chapter 13, but trustees are more demanding and Chapter 13 plans that would have worked under the old law do not always work now. [Read more…]

What do Bankruptcy Lawyers Do All Day Anyway

To my knowledge there has never been a television drama about bankruptcy lawyers (although there would certainly be a lot of possible story lines!).   So, as a rule, most people do not know what bankruptcy lawyers do all day long. 

Los Angeles bankruptcy lawyer Hale Antico answers this question accurately on his Los Angles Bankruptcy blog.  Hale’s experience, like mine, goes something like this:

  • Preparing an Objection to Proof of Claim for a Chapter 13 case where the pro se creditor thinks they should be a priority debt compared to a general unsecured non-priority claim. Of course, I needed a Declaration to go along with this for my client, the debtor.
  • Researching and negotiating a claim for a Chapter 13 bankruptcy where the Los Angeles Chapter 13 Trustee thinks that it might be unfair discrimination between claims in the same class to pay one nondischargeble claim 100% compared to the others.
  • Responding to a letter from the United States Trustee questioning whether a client should be entitled to a Chapter 7 discharge based on prior income.
  • Replying to a creditor who is very curious about massive credit card spending the debtor in another Chapter 7 case did prior to filing bankruptcy. There may be an adversary proceeding here on 11 USC 523.
  • Answering a bunch of questions from existing clients who, after hiring me to let ther house go in foreclosure during the bankruptcy, are now suddenly prey to realtors and real estate agents who want to “help them” with a quick sale and why bankruptcy is better than a short sale.
  • Personally reviewed a bankruptcy petition (you know, the simple bankruptcy forms) with a client before we both signed it and I file bankruptcy for him.
  • Preparing for court on Tuesday where I’m helping three clients get their cases “confirmed” at their Confirmation Hearings at the bankruptcy court (do we have the mortgage declarations? the plan payments? did we satisfy the Chapter 13 trustee’s requests for business expenses and short form?).

I can add to this list:

  • responding to email from a self employed client who is currently in Chapter 13, and who wants a dramatic reduction in monthly plan payments
  • responding to email from Chapter 13 client who now wants to convert to Chapter 7
  • calling Chapter 7 client whose 341 hearing is later this week to remind him to bring his ID’s
  • responding to potential client emails
  • replying to a blog or web site visitor who wants clarification of a point
  • answering email questions from blog readers

I recently appeared before one of the bankruptcy judges in the northern district of Georgia to request a somewhat higher than normal fee for a Chapter 13.  I found it somewhat cathartic to be able to explain to the judge that even "simple" Chapter 13 cases take up huge amounts of time because of the endless document requests and correspondence with the client, creditors and the trustee.

What Are They Going to Ask Me at My 341 Hearing

No matter how much your lawyer tries to reassure you, there is a good chance that you will be nervous and anxious at your 341 hearing.  Even though the consumer bankruptcy process is generally not very adversarial, no one likes to be in the witness chair.

My colleague, Kansas bankruptcy attorney Jill Michaux, recently published a very helpful blog post on her Kansas bankruptcy blog in which she sets out the questions you will likely face at your 341 hearing.  Although our Atlanta area Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 trustees don’t always ask this exact set of question, I think that Jill’s post will be of great help to a nervous debtor.

You can read Jill Michaux’ post entitled What Will They Ask Me at My Bankruptcy Hearing by clicking on the link.

Chapter 7 and Middle Class Debtors

Over the past few weeks, I have received several emails from potential clients that begin with lines like “my salary is over $100,000 and I need to file Chapter 7 to protect myself against lawsuits from credit card companies” or “together, my wife and I earn well over $100,000 but we need to file Chapter 7 because….”

In each of these cases, I have had to respond to the prospective client with the bad news that about 99% of the time, Chapter 7 is not going to be available to an individual or couple whose household income exceeds $100,000.   Why?  Under the current bankruptcy law, something called a “presumption of abuse” arises is your gross household income exceeds the “median income” for a similarly sized family in the State where you live.

In Georgia, where I practice, the median income for a family of 4 is $66,711.  If there are more than 4 people in a household, you would add $6,900.  If you make $100,000, you would need a family of 9 to fit within the median.  Note that these figures will be adjusted upward as of January 1, 2008 but the general principle here still applies.

If you do not meet the median income test, you could still qualify for Chapter 7 under something called a “means test” which allows you to deduct certain permitted expenses from your median income figure.  Unfortunately the means test is derived from IRS calculations used when people negotiate installment payments on overdue tax debt.  In other words, you don’t get a lot of deductions.

As a practical matter, you might squeeze into a Chapter 7 if your income is just over the median, but if you are $20,000 or $30,000 over the median, you are facing a real uphill battle.

If you don’t fit into a Chapter 7, your only alternative is Chapter 13.   Here, too, the $100,000 income family is likely to feel a squeeze.  My experience with the means test suggests that families the $70,000 to $100,000 range won’t qualify for Chapter 7, and the means test will require a Chapter 13 payment that often is not affordable.

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be working on a video presentation that will demonstrate how the means test works.

Do I Have to Give Back the Car I am Financing if I File a Chapter 7?

I have a question about the blog in Nov,2006.  You said that filing bankruptcy can stop car repossion .  But after you file chapter 7 do you get to keep the car and the debt is discharged or you can keep the car only if you promise to make payments on tht vehicle.  Because I have been told the only way you can keep the car when filing chapter 7 is if you promise to make payments and you do not include it in your chapter 7 bankruptcy.  I was told if you owe on the vehicle and place it in your chapter 7 bankruptcy you have to give the car back. Could you give me some insight.

Jonathan Ginsberg responds:  Fana, the minute you file a bankruptcy, all creditor action stops because of something called the "automatic stay."   There are a few exceptions to the automatic stay (i.e. multiple filings, child support debt, and a few other limited categories), but as a rule, all creditor action stops the minute you file.

Chapter 7 is primarily designed to get rid of unsecured debts like credit cards and medical bills.  In a Chapter 7, secured debts must be either reaffirmed or the collateral must be surrendered to the secured creditor.

Automobile loans are considered secured debts because the vehicle you purchased serves as security for the loan.  If you want to keep your vehicle in a Chapter 7, you must reaffirm it.  Reaffirmation of a vehicle loan is voluntary on the part of the secured creditor.  Generally, most car lenders will reaffirm if:

you are current with your payments

you have enough income to pay for the reaffirmed debt in your budget

your are able to shelter (exempt) your equity, if any, as part of your Chapter 7 petition

If the creditor refuses to reaffirm your choices are to surrender the vehicle or to convert to Chapter 13 where you can try to force a repayment down the lender’s throat.

If you do nothing – do not reaffirm and do not state any intention, the Bankruptcy Code will presume that your intention was to surrender and after the bankruptcy is over, the secured lender can repossess the vehicle.  Note that in this situation you would have no personal liability for a repossession deficiency – the Chapter 7 discharge serves to wipe out your personal liability.  However, the lien (in rem jurisdiction) that encumbers the vehicle remains and survives the bankruptcy.

So, if you are financing a vehicle and you file Chapter 7, there is a good chance that you can keep your vehicle if you qualify for a reaffirmation.

Weakening of Consumer Bankruptcy Protections Based on Faulty Assumptions

One of the consequences of the new bankruptcy law (BAPCPA law) has to do with erosion of protections offered by bankruptcy in various situations.  For example, the automatic stay provisions, which previously offered a comprehensive, no-questions-asked protection from any creditor action, no longer provides absolute protection in all circumstances.  Under BAPCPA, the automatic stay terminates in 30 days (unless you go to Court to renew it) in certain repeat filing situations and it does not exist at all in the third case filed within a year.

While the policy considerations that underlie this erosion of the automatic stay may be valid, my concerns are (1) when you create complicated exceptions to core concepts, the system loses predictability and public confidence and (2) the stage is set to undermine the entire bankruptcy system with exceptions that swallow the rules, i.e. the “slippery slope” argument.

I find the reduction in bankruptcy protection that applies to repeat filers especially troublesome.  There seems to be an underlying assumption that a debtor who seeks bankruptcy protection  – usually under Chapter 13 – more than once within a year is acting with less than honorable purposes.  In my experience, at least half of the second filers I see have to file a second case because they did not fully understand the process and their obligations thereunder the first time around.

In most jurisdictions, one or two high volume consumer bankruptcy firms account for a majority of the Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 filings.  These high volume firms are a product of the Bankruptcy Courts’ paternalistic attitude towards debtors and consumer bankruptcy counsel.  In most jurisdictions, the Judges set out “no look fee” provisions for Chapter 13 that essentially set the market rate for legal fees in that jurisdiction.  Although the standing court orders that set out these provisions are careful to state that the judges are not setting a fee, the practical effect is, in fact, to set a fee for services.

Because it is hardly practical for a small firm to spend three or four hours of non-billable time to present a fee application, most consumer bankruptcy attorneys accept the no look fee as a flat fee for services.  In the northern district of Georgia, for example, the no-look fee for Chapter 13 is around $4,500.  If a Chapter 13 lasts five years, that amounts to $500 per year to prepare, file and manage a case. Until just a few years ago, that no look fee was $1,500 for five years’ worth of work (that amounted to $300 for five years’ worth of work).

By contrast, in Chapter 11 cases, where the financial stakes may be in the millions of dollars, bankruptcy attorneys may bill at $500 or $600 per hour without any significant judicial interference.

Is it any wonder, therefore, that high volume consumer bankruptcy firms spend so little time with their clients to walk them through the filing and case management process.  Actually face to face attorney time in a high volume firm may amount to 30 minutes or less.  Further, because the business model dictates that costs must be kept down, the high volume firms have no choice but to rely on inexperienced, young lawyers who stay for a year or two then move on.

In simple consumer cases, a paralegal driven model may be fine and I personally have no issue with operating a law firm according to a profitable business model, especially when that model is driven by judicial control of attorney compensation.  In more complex cases, however, it may take a second or third filing for the debtor to find a lawyer who is equipped to deal with that debtor’s complicated problem.

The automatic stay issue discussed above is but one of the many erosions and exceptions to full relief now contained in the Code.  A 2005 article in the ABA Journal entitled “Debts that Will Follow You to the Grave” by Marc S. Stern and Larry B. Feinstein offers an excellent summary of other exceptions to bankruptcy relief.

The prevalence of high volume, limited service bankruptcy mill firms in every large jurisdiction is clearly the product of judicial control of bankruptcy fee payments in Chapter 13 cases.  Yet BAPCPA incorporates a simplistic formula to punish repeat filers, even those who have to seek repeat protection because they ended up in the wrong attorney’s office for their particular case.

Page optimized by WP Minify WordPress Plugin