Debtor and Ability to Reopen Bankruptcy

Generally, chapter 7 debtors have the right to reopen their cases for various purposes after their case is closed. Usually, the court will allow the debtor to do so to remove judicial liens for otherwise discharged debt via 11 U.S.C. §522(f) motion, or to add an overlooked creditor, or to file a financial management course certificate, or perhaps for another purpose.  In In re May E. Jones, Case No. 03-21929, debtor moved to reopen the case 13 years after it was closed, to amend the schedule of real property,  disclosing (for the first time) her interest in a parcel of real property and seeking to have the property abandoned to her under 11 U.S.C. §554. If the court were to reopen the case, a substantial real estate asset would likely revert to the debtor.

After reviewing the parties’ submissions and conducting an evidentiary hearing, Judge Warren found that the debtor was aware of her interest in the real property at the time the bankruptcy was filed but did not disclose that interest in her petition.  The court further found that reopening of the case would not be to the benefit to the creditors, and the debtor could not establish that she had acted in good faith at the time her Chapter 7 bankruptcy case was filed.

Concluding his decision, Judge Warren wrote:

The Court will not accept Jones’s invitation to turn a blind eye to the signals pointing toward bad faith, so that she can have the undisclosed assets abandoned back to her. That seems a bit like a parent rewarding a child who was caught hiding her failing report card with a hot fudge sundae.

What is the takeaway from this case?  The cardinal rule of bankruptcy is full and complete disclosure. Here, the debtor did not fully disclose all of her assets and did not act in good faith. Thus, the court denied her motion and debtor could not benefit from her actions. The above situation is unusual both in the length of time from the time of discharge and the relief sought.  However, I believe that it illustrates a simple principal that in bankruptcy a debtor cannot benefit from his wrongful conduct.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

 

Student Loans and Possibility of Discharge

I have previously written about dischargeability of student loans in bankruptcy. For most people filing bankruptcy does not result in a discharge of a student loan under the 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (“BAPCPA”) amendments. The code, as amended, does not provide for the discharge of a student loan in a bankruptcy. In order for the student loan to be discharged, the debtor must brings a lawsuit, known as adversarial proceeding, and ask bankruptcy judge to make a determination that the continued existence of the student loan will create an “undue hardship” on the debtor. Under the applicable prior decisions, “undue hardship” is the most difficult part, that is the debtor must convince the bankruptcy court judge that in this case under the circumstances applicable to this debtor, the debtor will not be able to make any significant payments on the student loans owed. The high burden of proof makes these lawsuits extremely difficult.

However, under appropriate circumstances, it may be possible to determine what position the Department of Education may take on student loan dischargeability. The Department of Education recently issued a guidance letter on whether a student loan dischargeability lawsuit will be litigated or whether the Department of Education will recommend agreeing to the discharge.

The Department of Education seems to be focusing on a number of factors such as debtor’s efforts in trying to repay the loans, physical or mental disability leading to inability to work, likelihood of significant future income and factors beyond debtor’s control that led to the filing of bankruptcy.

Private student loan lenders have no such policy and it will be up to the individual creditor/lender to determine if their attorney will defend such a lawsuit vigorously or agree to settlement before a trial or go to trial.

It is never easy to obtain discharge of student loans in bankruptcy and all potential alternatives should be explored. Another option may be Income-Based Repayment (“IBR”). This program was designed to make sure that graduates who aren’t earning a significant income after graduation aren’t spending all their income on repaying their student loans and may result in a significant payment reduction and potential loan cancellation.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Making a Choice Between Bankruptcy and Short Sale

Homeowners who are underwater on their home mortgages (underwater mortgage means that the homeowner owes more than his/her house is worth) often attempt to do a short sale. A short sale occurs when the homeowner sells the home to a third party for less than what is owed on the note, and the mortgage lender accepts the proceeds of the sale in full satisfaction of the note. The mortgage lender must approve the short sale before it can go through. A short sale can be a good option for homeowners who do not want to keep their homes, and are willing to move out almost right away.

However, before going through with a short sale, a homeowner should see if Chapter 7 Bankruptcy would be a better option. In a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, the homeowner’s liability on the note is discharged and the home does not have to be surrendered right away and the homeowner does not have to immediately move out of the house. The homeowner can continue to live in the house without making any payments while the lender goes through the lengthy process of foreclosure. In New York, foreclosures can take years before the mortgage lender can hold a foreclosure sale. Even after the house is sold at foreclosure sale, the new buyer (which is often the mortgage lender itself) has to start eviction proceedings to evict the homeowner from the home. This may give the homeowner time to save up money for a move or a new home. Any shortfall that may result from the sale of the house is eliminated in the bankruptcy, meaning the homeowner owes the mortgage lender nothing when they move.

A final, and highly significant, difference between Chapter 7 Bankruptcy and short sale is tax advantages of a bankruptcy filing. When a mortgage lender accepts a short sale, the homeowner will have to pay taxes on the amount forgiven by the lender. Under the tax code, debt forgiveness is considered income and the mortgage lender will generally send the homeowner IRS Form 1009-C form for it. The homeowner will have to report it as income on his/her tax return. As a result, the amount of forgiven debt will be added to the homeowner’s income as miscellaneous income, and while not subject to self-employment or social security tax, it will be subject to income taxes. If the amount of the forgiven debt is significant, the debtor may face an unexpected tax liability amounting to thousands of dollars. In a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, there is no tax liability for the debt that is eliminated as a result of the filing.

Deed in lieu of foreclosure is similar to a short sale. The main difference is that unlike short sale where the property is transferred to a third party, in deed in lieu of foreclosure, the property is transferred directly to the lender. It has tax consequences identical to those of a short sale.

Short sales and Chapter 7 Bankruptcies are both good options for homeowners who want to walk away for their homes and their mortgages. When your home is underwater and you are considering a short sale, it is important to talk to an experienced bankruptcy lawyer first. That way you can review your options and make an informed decision.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Can Debtor Keep a Credit Card After Filing Bankruptcy

I am often asked if debtor can keep a credit card after the bankruptcy is filed, especially if the credit card does not have a balance. Generally, debtors are always interested in trying to keep a credit card after the bankruptcy is filed whether as a means of having credit for emergencies or renting a car or hotel room.

My answer to these questions as follows.  Initially, the debtor is required to disclose to the bankruptcy court everyone the debtor owes money to. So, if there is money owed to a credit card issuer, this debt would have to be disclosed and listed in the petition, and, ultimately, discharged.

If the card does not have a balance, it does not need to be listed.  However, that card is still going to be closed by the issuer after the bankruptcy is filed, both for Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy cases. Essentially all credit card issuers subscribe to an automatic monitoring service such as AACER or one of AACER’s competitor. Those services will notify the bank even if a particular credit card is not listed in the petition.

In my experience, in nearly every case, all credit cards will be cancelled within days of the bankruptcy filing. Thus, it makes no difference if the card with zero balance is listed, but I usually list it anyway.

Once the debtor completes his or her Chapter 7 bankruptcy, the debtor is likely to be able to obtain new credit cards within 1 to 2 years after receiving the discharge.  At the same time, my advice to the debtors is not to open new credit cards or if a credit card is necessary, to open one with a low credit limit or a secured credit card. There is always a risk that debtor will become overextended once again, and it is prudent to avoid it.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Timeline of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case

Typical debtor(s)’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy case begins once a Petition is filed with the Bankruptcy Court. If the debtors are married, they may file a joint Petition. Debtor’s petition includes schedules listing assets, creditors, income, expenses, executory contracts, leases, and co-debtors. The Schedules are customarily filed along with the Petition. The Declaration Regarding Payment Advices and Credit Counseling Certificate are also usually filed along with the Petition. The filing fee is paid at the time of filing.

After filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, the following events take place.

Immediately:

Automatic Stay Order will be issued which prohibits  creditors from sending you letters, calling you, or taking any additional collection and/or legal action against debtor(s). Garnishments on bank accounts and paychecks must stop.

Bankruptcy Trustee will be assigned to your bankruptcy case and Meeting of Creditors will be scheduled.

The date to complete Financial Management Course is scheduled.

Approximately 15 days after bankruptcy case filing:

The Bankruptcy Clerk will mail debtor(s) and creditors the Notice of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case, Meeting of Creditors, & Deadlines, which provides the date set for your meeting of creditors and other important deadlines.

Within 30 days of bankruptcy case filing:

Statement of Intention must be filed, informing the court if debtor(s) plan to keep any collateral property or if you intend to submit it to your creditors. The Statement of Intention is usually filed along with the Petition, but debtor(s) can change his/her position on these issues.

14 days before 341 Meeting:

Debtor(s) most recent tax returns, paystubs, real estate documents, vehicle related documents, and other financial information are due to the Trustee 14 days before the date first set for the 341 meeting.

Approximately 4 weeks after bankruptcy case filing:

Meeting of Creditors, often referred to at a 341 meeting, will be held.

30 days after your 341 Meeting:

Deadline for the Bankruptcy Trustee or your creditors to object to your exemption claims.

Debtor(s) must perform his/her intentions as stated in the Statement of Intentions. Debtor(s) will need to surrender the property, reaffirm the debt, or redeem property for the allowed secured claim.

45 days after 341 Meeting:

Debtor(s) must have completed his/her Financial Management Education Course and filed a certificate of completion within 45 days of the first date set for the 341 meeting.

60 days after 341 Meeting:

Creditors must object to discharge of debts that were obtained by false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud; debt from fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, embezzlement or larceny; and debt for willful and malicious injury. This deadline applies to objections to discharge of: consumer debts owed to a single creditor of more than $500 for luxury goods or services obtained within 90 days before a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Creditors must also object within 60 days of the original 341 date for debts involving misconduct including transfer, destruction or concealment of property; concealment, destruction, falsification or failure to keep financial records; making false statements; withholding information; failing to explain losses; failure to respond to material questions; having received a discharge in a prior bankruptcy case filed within the last 6 years.

Trustee must determine if debtor(s) bankruptcy case should be dismissed due to abuse or debts discharged.

Reaffirmation agreements, if relevant, must be filed with the court.

More than 60 days after 341 Meeting:

Debtor(s)’s discharge will be filed by the Bankruptcy Clerk. However, at this point in time, the discharge is not absolute or final. The trustee can ask that the discharge be set aside if the debtor does not turn over non-exempt property, if the debtor fails to perform other duties, or if there were other matters pending which would result in the denial of the discharge.

90 days after 341 meeting:

All creditors (except for government entities) must file their proofs of claim if they wish to share in the payments from debtor(s)’s bankruptcy case if any assets are available for liquidation.

180 days after bankruptcy case was filed:

Government agencies or units must file a proof of claim within 180 days of the bankruptcy case filing.

Debtor(s) no longer risk losing property acquired or become entitled to after the bankruptcy case is filed as a result of inheritance, bequest, devise, property settlements involving divorce, or beneficiary on life insurance. Any inheritance that debtor(s) become entitled to after the bankruptcy case is filed is at risk of being liquidated by the Trustee if debtor(s) become entitled to it within 180 days of filing.

Final Decree will be entered by the Court officially closing the bankruptcy case. The Final Decree is often received near the time of the Discharge if your bankruptcy case is a no-asset bankruptcy case. If the Trustee is liquidating non-exempt assets, the bankruptcy case will remain open to allow the Trustee to distribute the funds to creditors and file a final report.

The above represents a typical timeline for a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy case.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Stripping Second Mortgages in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy

Handing banks a significant victory, in Bank of America v. Caulkett, the Supreme Court ruled that homeowners who file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy may not expect to have their second mortgage loans canceled, even if they owe more on their homes than the properties are worth.  In a unanimous decision, the court held that second mortgages may not be “stripped off,” or voided, if the property is underwater, or worth less than the mortgage debt. Caulkett decision protects mortgage lenders, which extended second mortgages during the housing boom on homes that are now worth much less than their values when they were purchased.

The ruling, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, came from Chapter 7 bankruptcy cases filed in 2013 by homeowners who sought to strip off their second mortgages. The named plaintiff, David B. Caulkett, owed a first mortgage totaling $183,264 at the time of his bankruptcy filing, but his home was valued at $98,000.

The lender for Mr. Caulkett’s first mortgage could have expected to recover part of the loan by selling the home, since the house was considered collateral for the loan. But his lawyer argued that his home was so far underwater that the $47,855 second mortgage he took out from Bank or America was essentially unsecured, and thus should be stripped off as part of his bankruptcy filing.

In Chapter 7 bankruptcy, debtors are typically permitted to cancel unsecured debts like credit cards and personal loans. The question before the Supreme Court was whether a second mortgage could be considered such an unsecured debt because the “security” backing the loan had been wiped out by falling home values. The United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit sided with Mr. Caulkett, and Bank of America appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled that the second mortgage could not be stripped off simply because the home, the security underlying the debt, was worth less than the mortgage. The Supreme Court ruling will now prevent underwater homeowners from easily discharging home equity loans and other types of second mortgages in Chapter 7 bankruptcies.

The Supreme Court ruling does not completely prevent homeowners from voiding their second mortgages. Homeowner may still seek to strip off second mortgages after filing Chapter 13 bankruptcy case.  In order to do so, the debtor must file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case and what is known as a “Pond” motion.  The motion is named after a decision, In re Pond, 252 F.3d 122 (2nd Cir. 2001). Here is a detailed discussion of Pond motion and the process of stripping a second mortgage.

This decision forces the debtors and their bankruptcy lawyer to engage in a cost benefit analysis in a situation where there is a wholly unsecured second or mortgage.  Assuming the debtors can file either Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, the benefits of filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy and discharging all unsecured debt, should be compared to the benefit of a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy plan payments over 5 years, and a likely discharge of the unsecured second or third mortgage.  Assuming the debtors wish to retain their residence, the comparison of two figures should point them in the right direction.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Unpaid College Tuition Can Be Discharged In Bankruptcy

Generally, pursuant to Section 523(a)(8) of the Bankruptcy Code student loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy, unless the debtor is facing truly remarkable circumstances. However, unpaid college tuition is not treated the same way and can be discharged in bankruptcy.

In a recent case, D’Youville College v. Girdlestone (AP 14-1018 W.D.N.Y. 2015), Bankruptcy Judge Carl L. Bucki held that unpaid college tuition is treated differently than unpaid  student loans and that the changes in the bankruptcy code in 2005 did not alter the results of the earlier Second Circuit cases. In D’Youville, the debtor attended the college only for a semester and had agreed to pay tuition but did not sign a promissory note.

In Girdlestone, Judge Bucki followed the holding in Cazenovia College v. Renshaw (In re Renshaw), 222 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 2000), which held that the mere obligation to pay tuition does not constitute a loan that is non-dischargeable under the Bankruptcy Code.

D’Youville College argued that under the amendments to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8) that Congress adopted in 2005, unpaid tuition should be treated the same was as student loans. In 2005 the Bankruptcy Code provisions related to student loans were changed, and even private student loans, not guaranteed by the government or provided by a school receiving government funding, were no longer dischargeable in bankruptcy. Section 523(a)(8)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code now states that the debtor will not receive a discharge of “any other educational loan that is a qualified education loan, as defined in section 221(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, incurred by a debtor who is an individual.” According to Internal Revenue Code §221(d)(1), a “qualified education loan” means “any indebtedness” that a taxpayer incurs to pay certain qualified higher education expenses.

Judge Bucki held that “under the Bankruptcy Code, nondischargeability extends not to any such “qualified education loan,” but only to “any other educational loan that is a qualified education loan.” Further, according to Cazenovia College, “to constitute a loan there must be (i) a contract, whereby (ii) one party transfers a defined quantity of money, goods, or services, to another, and (iii) the other party agrees to pay for the sum or items transferred at a later date.” 222 F.3d at 88. When a student unilaterally does not pay tuition, the student may be indebted to the school, but that indebtedness does not make the transaction a loan. Based on the above, Judge Bucki held that because Cazenovia College would deny this status to the claim of D’Youville College, D’Youville’s claim is not excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8).

Since it is very difficult to discharge student loans, the above decision represents a rare positive result for the debtor. However, most college graduates do not deal with the same issues because most colleges require payment before students can graduate and a significant number of students take out student loans as opposed to owing money directly to their school.

If you are contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, New York, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Changes to the Bankruptcy Means Test as of May 15, 2015

Once again, the means test figures for median income are being changed as of May 15, 2015. In New York, it means that the amount of income that the debtor can have before being forced into a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy is going to increase.

Through May 14, 2015, a single debtor in New York could have $48,840 in income in income and still be able to file Chapter 7 Bankruptcy.  Starting May 15, 2015, that figure has been increased to $49,632.  Similar increases will take place for all family sizes. The comparison of the existing and new income limits is below.

Old Income Limits

FAMILY SIZE

1 EARNER         2 PEOPLE              3 PEOPLE              4 PEOPLE *

$48,840              $60,743                 $71,706               $88,156

New Income Limits

FAMILY SIZE

1 EARNER         2 PEOPLE                3 PEOPLE             4 PEOPLE *

$49,632               $61,728                    $72,869                $89,586

* Add $8,100 for each individual in excess of 4.

While the increases are not large, they are an improvement on the last set of income limits.  The reason for a slight growth in the median income is the slight growth in the earnings of an average American family. Since the economy is struggling to recover,employees wages having been increasing slowly.  As a result, the American median family income has grown only slightly, and means test figures increased only moderately.

It should be noted that even if the debtor’s income exceeds the means test figures, debtor may still qualify for Chapter 7 bankruptcy after all allowable expenses are taken into account.

If you are contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, New York, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.

Reinstatement of Dismissed Chapter 13 Bankruptcy

In a recent decision, In re Trine, Bk. 13-21520 (W.D.N.Y. 2015), the Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of New York held that once dismissed, a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy case cannot be reopened absent “extraordinary circumstances”. The failure of the debtor and her attorney to respond to the letters from the court and motions does not meet “extraordinary circumstances” standard.

In Trine, the debtor made a motion to reopen a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Case that had been dismissed two months earlier. The reason for the motion was debtor’s failure to make payments pursuant to the terms of the plan.

In  most Rochester Chapter 13 Bankruptcy cases, plan payments are deducted from the debtor’s wages pursuant to the order of the bankruptcy court. A Chapter 13 Bankruptcy debtor is obligated to start plan payments within 30 days of filing the plan whether or not the employer has started to deduct payments from wages. In Rochester, the debtors are typically informed by their attorneys as well as Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Trustee when plan payments must start, and are given specific instructions as to how to make these payment, in what amounts, and where to send them.

For reasons that are unclear, the debtor in Trine did not make any plan payments during the first three months of the case.  Subsequently, the Chapter 13 Trustee sent the debtor and her attorney a letter stating that the plan payments were in default, and requesting that the debtor or attorney respond withing 10 days, that if they failed to respond a motion to dismiss the case would follow, and that if the case was dismissed the creditors would be immediately notified of the dismissal.  The trustee stated he would be willing to accept an arrangement where  the default could be cured over a period of time.

Neither debtor nor her attorney responded to the letter.  Subsequently, the Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Trustee brought a motion to dismiss. After several court appearances, the court gave to the debtor an additional three months to bring the plan current. When that time expired and the plan was still in arrears, the Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Trustee filed a report that the payments had not been brought current and the court entered an order dismissing the case.

Once the case was dismissed, one of the creditor’s repossessed the debtor’s car. Only after the car was repossessed, the debtor’s attorney made a motion, asking for the dismissal to be vacated and the case reinstated so that the car could be returned to the debtor. The Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Trustee opposed the motion, and the court denied it.

The debtor in this case relied on the ‘catch-all’ grounds of Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows relief from a judgment or order for “any other reason that justifies relief.” Case law interpreting Rule 60(b) states that relief will only be granted by the existence of “extraordinary circumstances”. Judge Warren stated in his decision that this provision “does not provide the easy procedural do-over frequently envisioned by litigants appearing before this court”. The court found that since neither the debtor nor the attorney responded to the default letter or the motion to dismiss, and did not appear at the hearings, the debtor did not present any extraordinary circumstances that would justify the reopening of the case.

Once the debtor received the first letter from the Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Trustee, she should have immediately contacted her attorney as well as Trustee to find out why the payments were not being made.  Further, if the debtor receives a notice of hearing from the Bankruptcy Court, that notice should not be ignored.

If you contemplating filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, or are dealing with debt problems in Western New York, including Rochester, Canandaigua, Brighton, Pittsford, Penfield, Perinton, Fairport, Webster, Victor, Farmington, Greece, Gates, Hilton, Parma, Brockport, Spencerport, LeRoy, Chili, Churchville, Monroe County, Ontario County, Wayne County, Orleans County, Livingston County, and being harassed by bill collectors, and would like to know more about how bankruptcy may be able to help you, contact me today by phone or email to schedule a FREE initial consultation with a Rochester, NY, bankruptcy lawyer.