The creditors were not entitled to have the court vacate its order of discharge where they claimed their untimely objection was in reliance on a verbal agreement between the debtor’s counsel and the trustee to extend the deadline but the court never ordered any extension. In re Kharlanov, No. 22-70984 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, 2022). Read More
-
Creditors Cannot Rely on Verbal Agreement to Extend Deadline
Posted by NCBRC - September 30th, 2022
-
Servicer Sanctioned for Post-Foreclosure Dunning
Posted by NCBRC - September 28th, 2022
The bankruptcy court did not err in finding the mortgage servicer violated the discharge injunction or in awarding over $10,000 in sanctions where the servicer continued to dun the debtor for payment after the debtor had received her chapter 7 discharge and relinquished the home in a foreclosure sale. Berry v. Fay Servicing, LLC, No. 21-8005/8007 (B.A.P. 6th Cir. Sept. 9, 2022). Read More
-
Mortgage Creditor Sanctioned for Miscalculating Claim
Posted by NCBRC - September 16th, 2022
The debtor was entitled to attorney’s fees and a reduction in the mortgagee’s arrearage claim where the mortgagee failed to reduce the arrearage by the entire amount the debtor had paid in his prior chapter 13 bankruptcy. In re Simmons, No. 22-680 (Bankr. D. S.C. Aug. 31, 2022). Read More
-
Wrongful Possession Does Not Confer Property Interest
Posted by NCBRC - September 13th, 2022
“[A] debtor’s mere possession of a property, without a good-faith claim to it, does not save an installment contract for § 1322(c)(1) relief.” In re Peralta, No. 20-3496 (3rd Cir. Sept. 7, 2022).
The debtor bought his house on an installment contract rather than through a traditional mortgage. After he breached the contract, he and the seller entered into a new agreement where the debtor agreed to resume regular payments but if he defaulted again, the seller would exercise its right to get a judgment for possession, and the debtor would vacate the house. The agreement specified that a second breach would “extinguish[ ] any and all rights, liens, and/or interest” the debtor had in the house. Read More
-
Laches Forecloses Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss
Posted by NCBRC - September 8th, 2022
Where the Trustee slept on her right to challenge the debtor’s method of calculating her plan payments until shortly before the debtor completed her plan, the doctrine of laches compelled denial of the trustee’s motion to dismiss. In re Melcher, No. 16-21536 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Aug. 30, 2022).
The debtor and the chapter 13 Trustee negotiated a 60-month plan in which the debtor agreed to commit one third of her annual gross income over $120,000 to the plan (“excess income payments”). The debtor calculated her first excess income payment by taking the income from Box 1 of her W-2 form, subtracting $120,000 and multiplying the result by .33. After discussion with the Trustee and one of her creditors, the debtor’s payment was accepted as correct. The debtor used the same method of calculation for the following years’ excess income payments. Read More
-
$1.7 Million Retirement Accounts Not Part of Estate
Posted by NCBRC - September 6th, 2022
The court held its nose and slogged through the trustee’s lengthy complaint riddled with errors and legal misconceptions to find that the debtor’s retirement accounts totaling approximately $1.7 million were not property of the bankruptcy estate. McDonnell v. Gilbert (In re Gilbert), No. 21-12725, Adv. Proc. No. 22-1005 (Bankr. D. N.J. Aug. 23, 2022). Read More
-
SG Agrees 10th Erred But Opposes Cert
Posted by NCBRC - September 2nd, 2022
Despite agreeing that the Tenth Circuit got it wrong, the Solicitor General for the United States filed a brief opposing certiorari in the case of Kinney v. HSBC Bank USA, No. 21-599 (brief filed Aug. 30, 2022). The issue was a simple one: whether the debtor could receive a completion discharge under section 1328(a) when she missed the final three payments on her mortgage due to a car accident, but made up the payments shortly after her plan expired. Read More
-
DCS Properly Sought to Collect Child Support after Settlement
Posted by NCBRC - August 31st, 2022
The Oregon Division of Child Services did not violate the automatic stay or the terms of the confirmation order when it engaged in collection activities where the efforts related to a time not covered by the debtor’s settlement agreement with his ex-wife forgiving all child support payments predating the adoption of their child. In re Bronson, No. 20-30704 (Bankr. D. Ore. Aug. 23, 2022). Read More
-
Debt Based on Breach of Pre-Divorce Stipulation Nondischargeable
Posted by NCBRC - August 26th, 2022
A debt based on breach of a Stipulated Agreement that was incorporated but not merged into the final Judgment of Divorce was a debt “in connection with” a divorce decree within the meaning of section 523(a)(15) and was therefore nondischargeable in bankruptcy. Monassebian v. Monassebian, No. 21-41251, Adv. Proc. No. 21-1162 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Aug. 1, 2022). Read More
-
Sorry, Can’t Confirm Plan If You’re Dead
Posted by NCBRC - August 23rd, 2022
A debtor who has shuffled off this mortal coil cannot confirm a chapter 13 plan where he has no ability to fund it with future income and no need for the fresh start offered by bankruptcy discharge. In re Carrasco, No. 21-51420 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. July 19, 2022).
In this case, the debtor died after the meeting of the creditors, but before his proposed chapter 13 plan had been confirmed. The debtor’s counsel lobbied to substitute the debtor’s son to confirm the plan notwithstanding the fact that the debtor himself had ridden the carriage into immortality. The trustee objected to confirmation. Read More
-
Request Assistance
Request assistance with a case.
-
Help NCBRC
NCBRC needs your support to protect the rights of consumer bankruptcy debtors. The most effective way to support NCBRC is with a direct donation.
There are many other ways to give to NRBRC:
iGive.com: When you purchase items at over 1,400 online stores, a percentage of your purchase will be donated to NCBRC. Stores include Macy’s, Melissa and Doug, Bed Bath & Beyond, Nike, Petsmart, and more. Shop and Give today!
-
HAVEN Act Guide
The Honoring American Veterans in Extreme Need Act of 2019 (“HAVEN Act”) excludes certain benefits paid to veterans or their family members from the definition of current monthly income (“CMI”) found in the Bankruptcy Code. The HAVEN Act amends § 101(10A) of the Bankruptcy Code and supplements the 2005 amendments to the Code that excluded other government benefits, such as social security income.
This Guide provides an overview of the HAVEN Act identifies benefits that are excluded, and answers frequently asked questions.
-
Keep up with NCBRC
Thank you!
Thank you to the following organizations without whose support our work would not be possible.
American College of Bankruptcy
The American College of Bankruptcy is an honorary public service association of bankruptcy and insolvency professionals who are invited to join as Fellows based on a proven record of the highest standards of professionalism plus service to the profession and their communities. Together with its affiliated Foundation, the College is the largest financial supporter of bankruptcy and insolvency-related pro bono legal service programs in the United States.NACBA
The only national organization dedicated to serving the needs of consumer bankruptcy attorneys and protecting the rights of consumer debtors in bankruptcy. Formed in 1992, NACBA has more than 3,000 members located in all 50 states and Puerto Rico.O. Max Gardner Foundation, Inc.
Visit NACBA.org
The O. Max Gardner Foundation, Inc. provides financial support to institutions devoted to charitable, scientific, literary or educational purposes. NCBRC has been a recipient of grant awards from the foundation.