Posted by NCBRC - May 22nd, 2015
Bankruptcy’s automatic stay does not provide the benefits of Florida’s homestead exemption to preclude the debtors’ use of the state wildcard exemption. Valone v. Waage (In re Valone), No. 14-11457 (11th Cir. Apr. 29, 2015). Read More
Posted by NCBRC - May 20th, 2015
Factual considerations supported consolidation of separated spouses’ chapter 7 cases where the husband claimed federal exemptions and the wife claimed state exemptions. Boellner v. Dowden (In re Boellner), No. 14-2816 (8th Cir. May 12, 2015). Read More
Posted by NCBRC - May 18th, 2015
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court today found that funds paid into a confirmed chapter 13 plan that are undisbursed when the case is converted to chapter 7 should be returned to the debtor. Harris v. Viegelahn, 575 U.S. ___, No. 14-400 (May 18, 2015).
Posted by NCBRC - May 15th, 2015
“The deadline for filing a proof of claim in Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3002(c) applies to all claims, including those of secured creditors.” In re Pajian, No.14-2052 (7th Cir. May 11, 2015). Read More
Posted by NCBRC - May 12th, 2015
A Florida appellate court addressing a fraudulent scheme involving selling duplicate promissory notes, found that “the bank that first perfected its interest in a note and related mortgage is entitled to the priority of its interest.” HSBC Bank USA v. Perez, No. 4D13-3193 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. May 6, 2015). Read More
Posted by NCBRC - May 6th, 2015
The Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have announced a $63 million settlement in a dispute with the national mortgage servicing company, Green Tree Servicing. The FTC and CFPB charged Green Tree with thug-like collection methods including: barraging the debtor with phone calls as early as 5 a.m. and as late as 11 p.m.; threatening debtors with arrest, imprisonment, and garnishment; yelling at consumers and using obscene language; mocking illnesses and other personal situations causing financial distress; revealing debts to employers, neighbors, family; and taking payments out of debtors’ accounts without consent. It also failed to honor loan modifications, misapplied payments, provided incorrect creditor information to consumer reporting agencies, and overcharged or demanded unnecessary fees. $48 million of the settlement will go to affected consumers and $15 million represents civil penalties.
In addition to the $63 million dollars, the settlement requires Green Tree to clean up its act by implementing “a home preservation plan to offer options to consumers whose loans were transferred to the company during the time covered by the complaint.” It must cease collection on disputed debts until the completion of an investigation and verification of amounts owed. “The proposed order also prohibits Green Tree from making material misrepresentations about loans, processing procedures, payment methods, and fees, from taking unauthorized withdrawals from consumer accounts, and from violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.” In short, the order requires Green Tree to competently and honorably perform the services a loan “servicer” is meant to perform.
Posted by NCBRC - May 4th, 2015
The Supreme Court unanimously decided today that denial of confirmation is not a final, appealable, order. Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, 575 U.S. ___, No. 14-116 (U.S. May 4, 2015). Read More
Posted by NCBRC - April 30th, 2015
The chapter 7 trustee failed to continue the creditors’ meeting to a specified date as required by Rule 2003(e) and therefore his later objection to discharge was untimely. In re Jenkins, No. 14-1385 (4th Cir. Apr. 27, 2015). Read More
Posted by NCBRC - April 27th, 2015
The Seventh Circuit rejected the trustee’s argument to limit the debtor’s child support exclusion to those expenses that are not otherwise deductible under section 1325. In re Brooks, No. 14-2856 (7th Cir. Apr. 23, 2015). Read More
Posted by NCBRC - April 23rd, 2015
Using inflexible reasoning, a bankruptcy court found that the debtors could not amend their plan to make mortgage payments outside the plan. In re Vela, No. 12-06512 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. March 13, 2015). Read More