Rochester Bankruptcy and Debt Relief

Most of my Chapter 7 bankruptcy clients have a lot of credit card debt that was accumulated over time. That debt may have come from making purchases, incurring services charges and interest, as well as taking cash advances  on credit card. While most of credit card debts are dischargeable in bankruptcy, credit card cash advances may represent a significant problem for potential bankruptcy filer.

According to the Bankruptcy Code, any cash advance, or combination of cash advances from one lender, totaling more than $875, obtained within 70 days of the bankruptcy filing date is presumed to be non-dischargeable. This particular provision is included in Section 523(a)(2)(C)(i)(II). The dollar amount of the cash advance, changes every three years.

This provision was included in the Bankruptcy Code because the Congress was concerned that consumers, who obtained significant cash advances relatively close to time they filed for bankruptcy, knew or should have known that they would be seeking bankruptcy relief, and should not be able to eliminate such debts. Another reason for that provision was to prevent consumers from taking cash advances immediately prior to a bankruptcy filing.

However, in terms of procedural issues associated with cash advances taken out with 70 days prior to the filing, in order to have the court declare that the debt is non-dischargeable, the creditor must file objections in the bankruptcy court. Specifically, the creditor must file an adversary proceeding. Since there are filing fees and other expenses associated with such filings, if the amount of the cash advance is not particularly large, most creditors will not bother filing an adversarial proceeding.

However, since a cash advance may result in an adversary proceeding, I always ask my clients about them and, in appropriate situation, may ask the client to postpone the bankruptcy filing until after the expiration of the 70 day period.

If you are 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.

It is fairly common for Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 debtors to have credit cards that went into default some time ago. It is also common for credit card issuers to sell of delinquent credit card accounts.

In Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, all creditors are notified of the bankruptcy filing and can file claims. It is common for a new entity to file a proof of claim as successor or assignee of the original credit card issuer, but often such proof of claim does not include any evidence that the claim was, in fact, assigned. This situation is commonly referred to as a missing chain of title, missing proof that the claim has been legally transferred or assigned to the new owner.

Here in Rochester, United States Bankruptcy Court Judge John C. Ninfo II has issued several decisions addressing this issue. In one of them, In re Doherty and In re Benedetti, he held that in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, the successor creditor was obligated to prove it was the legal holder of the claim.

In Doherty, Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Trustee filed his objection to the successor creditor’s claim arguing that (1) successor creditor was not scheduled as a creditor in the petition; (2) although the debtors had scheduled the creditors that the successor creditor alleged originally held the claims, there was no breakdown in the proofs of claim to support the amounts alleged to be due,which differed from the amounts the debtors had scheduled; and (3) there was no assignment or bill of sale produced to  demonstrate that the successor creditor was the current holder of any of the claims that were alleged to have been sold and assigned to it.

Judge Ninfo held that the successor has failed to produce a chain of title from the alleged original holders of the claims to it by either a series of assignments or bills of sale, or by any other acceptable proof of ownership. As a result, he disallowed successor creditor’s claims, since there was no proof that it was a proper creditor entitled to file a proof of claim under Section 501 of the Bankruptcy Code.

This issue can be extremely important in Chapter 13 Bankruptcy cases where it may impact duration of the plan as well as the amount of money paid by debtors under the plan. In Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, this issue becomes particularly significant in asset cases, i.e., situations where debtors have nonexempt assets that the bankruptcy trustee may sell to pay the creditors.

If you are 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.

One issue that periodically comes up in bankruptcy cases is cross-collateralization of assets by credit unions. What does that mean? Cross-collateralization is basically the use of collateral from one loan to secure other loans.

Most credit unions, including local credit unions here in Rochester, New York, use “Loanliner” documents. These form agreements are used by financial institutions for their lending transactions. Included in standard Loanliner lending agreements is a provision in which the borrower agrees that all other loans with the lender are cross-collateralized. The cross-collateralization clause from a recent Loanliner agreement reads: “the security interest also secures any other loans, including any credit card loan, you have now or receive in the future from us and any other amounts you owe us for any reason now or in the future.”

Credit unions often use this clause in vehicle loan agreements to secure all other credit union debts with the vehicle. This may surprise someone when they discover that the debt on the car may include a personal loan, a line of credit, and credit card balances.

There are a few options in bankruptcy if the debtor has a cross-collateralized auto loan. If a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy case is filed, the debtor can request that the credit union prepare a reaffirmation agreement for the vehicle without regard to other debts. In this situation, the debtor is asking the credit union to voluntarily strip off the cross-collateralized loans. If the credit union rejects such request, the debtor has two options: (1) surrender the vehicle and discharge all debts to the credit union; or (2) redeem the vehicle.

If the debtor surrenders the car, the credit union takes the car back and sells it, usually at auction. Any deficiency left on the car loan and all additional cross-collateralized debts owed to the credit union are discharged in the Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. If the debtor in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy chooses to redeem the car, the debtor gets to keep a vehicle by paying the value of the vehicle, not the total debt that is owed. While somewhat similar to a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy cram-down, redemption requires that the payment to the secured creditor must be made in a lump sum and does not allow for payments over time.

If the debtor is filing a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, the loan can be crammed-down to match the vehicle’s value provided that the loan is over 910 days old. Any remaining debt is treated as unsecured debt and is discharged at the end of the Chapter 13 case. Another option is to surrender the vehicle just as in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy.

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.

I have previously written how important it is for debtors to provide their bankruptcy attorney with accurate and complete information. Debtors have an absolute obligation under the Bankruptcy Code to disclose their assets, liabilities and income to the bankruptcy court. Once in a while, a debtor may forget a creditor or overlook an old debt. Not every debt appears on the credit report either. When a debt is omitted from the bankruptcy petition, under the Bankruptcy Code, there are several possible solutions.

Initially, if the debtor realizes that a debt was overlooked during the bankruptcy, the debtor is required to file amended schedules and identify the creditor. If this happens, the bankruptcy attorney should be notified and he will amend the schedules.

If a pre-bankruptcy debt is discovered after the bankruptcy case has been closed and discharge granted, there are a couple of possible options. In some situations, it will be necessary to request that the bankruptcy court reopens the bankruptcy case and discharge the debt. In other situations, especially in no asset Chapter 7 Bankruptcy cases, the debt is considered discharged as a matter of law, even though it wasn’t listed in the schedules. Finally, some types of debt, such as student loans, cannot be discharged under most circumstances, and will survive the bankruptcy.

The bankruptcy courts expect the debtor to provide a full and complete disclosure of both assets and liabilities. In Chapter 7 Bankruptcy asset cases and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy cases, an omission matters a great deal since listed creditors receive payments through the bankruptcy court. If a debtor deliberately fails to list a creditor, that debt is likely be declared non-dischargeable and will survived the bankruptcy. Under appropriate circumstances, courts have denied debtor a bankruptcy discharge because of the debtor’s intentional failure to list all debts or revoked already issued discharge.

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.

When a debtor files for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy in New York, the typical end result is either a 3 or 5 year plan requiring the debtor to pay his disposable income to the bankruptcy trustee, who in turn will pay to the debtor’s creditors. Occasionally, a debtor may suffer further financial reverses or health problems, so that the repayment plan is no longer affordable, and there is not possibility of modifying the plan. While one of the options is converting the Chapter 13 Bankruptcy into Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, it may not always be possible because of the means test issues.

If debtor can’t keep up with Chapter 13 plan payments, U.S. Bankruptcy Code includes a provision called a Hardship Discharge that provides relief for debtors who can’t continue with a Chapter 13 bankruptcy.  The hardship discharge is contained for in 11 U.S.C. 1328(b). The debtor who cannot complete the repayment plan, can ask the court for a hardship discharge. In most cases, the discharge is only available when the following conditions are met:

Through no fault of his own, debtor has experienced circumstances that are beyond his control that makes it impossible for him to continue to make plan payments.
The payments made so far in the Chapter 13 Plan are at least as much as each creditor would have received in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation case, i.e., the “best interest” test is satisfied.
The repayment plan can’t be modified to allow debtor to continue making payments at a lower amount.

When it is expected that the period of hardship is short, the bankruptcy courts prefer that debtor moves to modify his Chapter 13 Plan to pay a lower amount than was originally agreed upon until circumstances change for the better.  Given the present economic difficulties, bankruptcy courts, here in Rochester and elsewhere in New York, are willing to consider a hardship discharge as a way to move the case forward rather than risking dismissal or conversion to Chapter 7 Bankruptcy.

If debtor cannot continue to work as a result of an illness or injury, it is likely that his income was reduced significantly or he may not be able to work at all. In some cases, debtor might not have any money left over once his basic living expenses are met. In this case, a hardship discharge may be the answer. It will eliminate any debts that are dischargeable in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

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.

It is common for someone who is about to file Chapter 7 Bankruptcy to have a pending or upcoming foreclosure action.  It is also common for the debtors to have a house that is “under water”, i.e., to owe more on their first mortgage than their house is worth.  It is also common for the debtors to have a second mortgage such as a standard mortgage, line of credit or a home equity line of credit. If the first mortgage exceeds the value of the home, it is clear that the second mortgage has no equity in the house to support it, and is fully unsecured.

Once the debtors or their bankruptcy attorney realize the above, the debtors have a choice to make. They can file a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, assuming that they can pass the means test. If the debtors are eligible for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, their personal liability under both mortgages can be eliminated. Then, the debtors can decide to pay the first mortgage only. They may also decide to take a calculated risk that the second mortgage holder would try to foreclose on its mortgage.  But would the lender actually commence a foreclosure?  Initially, unless the second mortgage holder acquires the first mortgage, it would end up with a house subject to a first mortgage that exceeds what the house is worth.  That would likely make any such attempted foreclosure a money losing proposition.  Also, if the first mortgage holder forecloses, that foreclosure would eliminate the second mortgage.

Another option that the debtors have is to file Chapter 13 Bankruptcy. While Chapter 13 will carry with it a repayment plan that may last as long as 5 years, it also allows for “lien stripping”, otherwise known as “Pond” motion.  In Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, the totally unsecured mortgage is wiped away and no longer a lien on the debtors’ home.  Then, the second mortgage is treated as unsecured debt that gets repaid in the bankruptcy in accordance with the terms of their repayment plan. According to bankruptcy courts’ decisions, the debtors have to receive a Chapter 13 discharge before the lien is stripped.

Most of the decisions addressing Chapter 7 Bankruptcies hold that the debtors cannot “strip” their fully second unsecured mortgage in a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy case.

One important reason for many debtors to stay in their house after Chapter 7 is that it may cost them less to pay the mortgage than to rent another place to live.  The second mortgage becomes a lot less important since the debtors may be able to strip it right away in Chapter 13, and, if economic conditions don’t improve, the debtors might be able to strip it 4 years from the date they filed their chapter 7 case – when they are eligible for a discharge under Chapter 13.

Another option that may be available to some debtors is to have their mortgage recast under the new Home Mortgage Modification Program.  In my experience, here in Rochester, lenders are willing to work with debtors to recast their mortgages.  Assuming that the debtors have ability to pay their mortgage, and meet other financial requirements, their mortgage may be modified by their lender.

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.

Sometimes I am asked by debtors if  they can pay their creditors after they received a bankruptcy discharge. My answer to them is that there is nothing in the bankruptcy law that prohibits debtors from voluntarily paying their creditors, either those creditors that are important to you, or all of them. However, for me as a bankruptcy lawyer, it can be a bit difficult to understand since debtors typically file for bankruptcy protection because they cannot afford to pay their creditors.  At the same time, I understand that under some circumstances debtors make a deliberate decision to repay someone.

In many different situations, debtors have creditors that are important to them. Those creditors may be family member who have loaned debtors money. Typically, debtors do not want to discharge the debt owed to close relatives. In those situations, my advice is to list the debt but, once the case is over, repay it voluntarily.

Another usual situation is where the debtor may have credit at a small, local store. Since it may be important for the debtor to have that access to such credit, the debtor may choose to pay that debt even after the bankruptcy case is over and the debt is discharged.

From the creditor’s side, once the bankruptcy is filed, the creditor may not contact the debtor to attempt to “persuade” him to “voluntarily” pay the debt. TIf any creditors does this, it would be viewed by the bankruptcy court as an attempt to collect a discharged debt in violation of the discharge injunction.

If the debtor decides to repay a debt after filing for either Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, he should be very careful about making payments on a discharged debt. If a creditor were to sue the debtor on a discharged debt in state court, the debtor could raise the fact that the debt was discharged in bankruptcy by raising it as an affirmative defense in state court litigation or he could remove the action to bankruptcy court and allow the bankruptcy court to enforce its discharge injunction. By making payments on a discharged debt, the debtor could create a “waiver” of the bankruptcy discharge on that particular debt.

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.

For most part, filing either Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 bankruptcy is an administrative process. The bankruptcy lawyer gathers information, prepares and files the petition. In Chapter 7 bankruptcy, the debtor attends a brief hearing conducted by a trustee.   In Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, the debtor also has to attend a confirmation hearing. However, in some cases an “adversary proceeding” is filed.

An adversary proceeding is essentially a case within a case. It is a lawsuit within either Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy case about an issue related to the bankruptcy case. There are many other situations in which adversary proceedings arise. In other instances, the debtor brings the adversary proceeding to bring a claim or to obtain a determination from the court. The Bankruptcy Rules of Procedure specify the situations in which parties must file adversary proceedings.

There are three parties in the bankruptcy court case who can file an adversary proceeding. Those parties are the creditor, the trustee (either the Chapter 7 Bankruptcy trustee, Chapter 13 bankruptcy Trustee, or the United States Trustee), and the debtor. Each adversarial proceeding is heard by the United States Bankruptcy Judge for the district where the bankruptcy is filed. For the cases filed here in Rochester, the adversary proceeding cases are heard by Hon. John C. Ninfo, II.

When a creditor files an adversary proceeding, it is usually because the creditor is claiming that the debt owed to the creditor should not be discharged in the bankruptcy. Usually the creditor will argues that it is only that particular creditor’s claim that should not be discharged since it falls within one of the exceptions to discharge, such as a debt created through fraud, willful or malicious injury, or a personal injury caused by drunk driving.  Alternatively, the creditor may argue that the filing of the bankruptcy case was done in bad faith and the debtor is not entitled to the discharge altogether.  These kinds of adversary proceedings are not common.

Another kind of adversary proceeding is filed by the Chapter 7 Trustee, Chapter 13 Trustee, or the United States Trustee. A trustee may argue that the schedules were not filled out accurately and were intentionally fraudulent. A trustee may file a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy case if paperwork is not filed timely, improperly, or if the debtor misses a court date without a good reason. A trustee may file an adversary proceeding seeking to collect money back from a creditor who received funds or property from a debtor. A trustee may also file an adversary proceeding to reverse a transfer of real property. The United States Trustee may file an adversarial proceeding to force the debtor to move from Chapter 7 Bankruptcy to Chapter 13 bankruptcy, if the U.S. Trustee believes that the filing of the bankruptcy petition was done in bad faith. The U.S. Trustee may also file an adversary proceeding to dismiss the case, if the U.S. Trustee believes the filing of any bankruptcy petition was done to abuse the bankruptcy system.

Finally, a debtor may file an adversary proceeding against a creditor. The debtor may recover damages for a creditor’s actions taken in violation of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, or violated the automatic stay, or the discharge (such as contacting the debtor after the bankruptcy is completed).

Mere fact that an adversary proceeding is filed does not mean that the party filing it will prevail. The bankruptcy judge will hear the case and will determine each party’s rights. It is the job of the bankruptcy attorney to advise the party as to the likelihood of success in an adversary proceeding, but the case will be decided by the bankruptcy judge .

The following is an example of a situation where an adversary proceeding is filed. The debtor obtained a large cash advance prior to filing.  That cash advance was used to prevent a foreclosure or recover a vehicle after a repossession. However, the credit card issuer is likely to object claiming that the cash advance taken out only a few months prior to filing bankruptcy and argue that the debt is nondischargeable since it was either fraudulent or the money was borrowed in anticipation of the bankruptcy filing.

The litigation would commence with a filing or a complaint. An answer would serve, and the parties would engage in discovery. If the parties were unable to resolve their dispute during pretrial proceedings, there would be a trial.

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.

Once debtor’s Chapter 13 Bankruptcy plan is confirmed, the debtor has an obligation to make monthly payments.  Unfortunately, sometimes circumstances change and the debtor cannot continue to make payments.  When the debtor can’t make the payments on a confirmed Chapter 13 plan, the choices available to the debtor are limited.  While there are a number of options, the best option for the debtor is usually a hardship discharge under §1328(b).

A bankruptcy discharge under §1328(b) eliminates all the debt that would have been dischargeable had the case been filed initially as a  Chapter 7 Bankruptcy.  While certain types of claims would still survive a hardship discharge, but the remainder of the debt is discharged, as if the plan has been completed over its term.

In order to obtain a hardship discharge, the debtor has to satisfy the best interests of creditors test, i.e.,  creditors must have received at least as much as they would have received had the case been filed as a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy.  Additionally, the debtor’s reasons for his inability to complete the plan must be events outside of the debtor’s control.  Usual events include death, illness,  job loss, and, occasionally, divorce.

I prefer hardship discharge  for my clients, as opposed to converting a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy to Chapter 7 Bankruptcy?  When the discharge is entered under Chapter 13, the debtor is eligible to file another Chapter 13 immediately.  If the case is converted to a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, the debtor cannot file under either chapter of the Bankruptcy code for a period of time.  An additional advantage of a hardshipt discharge is that there is no need for a new 341 meeting or amended schedules, as there would be if the case were converted to Chapter 7.

Since Chapter 13 Bankruptcy often includes debt that is not dischargeable in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, while the hardship discharge won’t discharge priority taxes, by obtaining a hardship discharge, the debtor is eligible to file another Chapter 13 when he is again healthy or employed.  Further, the debtor can receive the automatic stay in a subsequent case to finish paying the debts that often caused the Chapter 13 Bankruptcy.

In subsequent posts, I intend to discuss additional options available to the debtor.

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.

On March 23, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in United Student Aid Funds v. Espinosa, No. 08-1134 (2010), which affirmed the 9th Circuit’s holding that a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy debtor can obtain a discharge of a student loan by including it in a Chapter 13 plan.  The loan can be discharged if the creditor fails to object after notice and opportunity to do so, and the bankruptcy court enters an order confirming the Chapter 13 plan.

In a typical bankruptcy, whether Chapter 7 Bankruptcy or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, a student loan is not discharged unless the bankruptcy court makes a determination that the student loan would be an undue hardship on the debtor. Under Bankruptcy Rules, the court is required to make such a determination in an adversary proceeding, which is a lawsuit within the bankruptcy case.  In United Student Aid Funds, the debtor did not bring an adversary proceeding.  Rather, the debtor put in his plan that only the principal amount of the student loan would be paid through the plan, but that accrued interest would be discharged.  The student loan lender did receive a copy of the plan, and even filed a Proof of Claim.  However, the lender did not object to confirmation of the Chapter 13 plan.

Subsequently, the bankruptcy court entered an order confirming the plan as proposed.  After confirmation, the Chapter 13 trustee sent a notice to the lender, saying that the Proof of Claim amount differed from the amount stated in the Chapter 13 plan, and that if the lender disputes the amount in the plan, it should notify the trustee within 30 days.  After the debtor completed his plan payment, several years later, the student loan lender tried to collect the remaining amount due.

The debtor filed a motion seeking enforcement of his bankruptcy discharge.  The lender filed a motion seeking to declare the order confirming the Chapter 13 plan void.  Ultimately, this was the issue that the Supreme Court resolved. That is, the student loan lender argued that the bankruptcy court order confirming the Chapter 13 plan void because the lender was denied due process regarding the required statutory finding of undue hardship, which did not happen in this case.

The Supreme Court, in looking only at Bankruptcy Rule 60(b)(4), which permits a court to relieve a party for a final order or judgment, found that the lender was not denied due process, since the lender did receive the plan, filed a claim, and received the notice from the chapter 13 trustee.  The Court agreed that the confirmation of the plan without an undue hardship determination was legal error, however, the legal error does not void the order.  The Court noted that Rule 60(b)(4) strikes a balance between the need for finality of judgments, and the right of parties to have a full and fair opportunity to raise issues and the lender had ample notice and opportunity to contest the debtor’s actions.

What is to be learned from United Student Aid Funds?  Bankruptcy lawyers are well aware of the fact that lenders can make errors in dealing with both Chapter 7 Bankruptcies and Chapter 13 Bankruptcies.  However, in most chapter 13 bankruptcies, here in Rochester, New York, and elsewhere, the student loans are paid pro rata through the plan.  Thus, the bankruptcy lawyers are unlikely to follow the debtor’s approach to the student loans in United Student Aid Funds, since it is likely to be rejected by the bankruptcy court.  It appears that the bankruptcy court in that case ignored its obligation to make sure that the debtor followed the Bankruptcy Code in his Chapter 13 Bankruptcy.  At the same time , there is little harm in trying to discharge some or all of the student loan debt, since if the above approach is followed, and the bankruptcy court or the bankruptcy trustee object, the plan can be amended to comply with the law, but if the bankruptcy court rubberstamps the plan and the lender fails to object in a timely manner, the debtor may get a discharge.

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.