Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/09/2011 - 23:11
A new Chapter 13 controversy is brewing over whether a debtor can take an additional $200 “Old Car” operating allowance on the means test for paid-off vehicles that are more than six (6) model years old or that have more than 75,000 miles. While the United States Trustee has generally conceded the issue, a number of Chapter 13 trustees have not. In the Sout
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 06/28/2011 - 03:32
Sometimes it is worthwhile to put up a fight when you're being sued on a credit card or mortgage loan deficiency. The truth is, many times, the lender does not have the evidence available to prove the case, or does not have the means to get the proof admitted into evidence -- a crucial step to win a judgment for the debt against the borrower.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 05/23/2011 - 17:33
I have written several blogs which address the blight of the homeowner in trouble because of the recent economic downturn. I’m talking about people who borrowed an affordable sum after making a down payment to purchase their dream home. Until the recent economic downturn these homeowners made their monthly payments ( in many cases for years). Then layoffs started. In a great number of cases it was impossible to replace lost jobs at their salary range.. Many were forced to accept jobs paying less. By the time life starting getting back to normal, their mortgage payments were way behind.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 05/19/2011 - 20:40
It's a little known, but extremely valuable, technique employed by experienced bankruptcy lawyers: Using the "automatic stay" feature of bankruptcy to get a repossessed car back into the hands of its owner.
Our DC-based bankruptcy law firm used it the other day to get a car back for a young man in Northern Virginia who needed his car to get around and commute to his job.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 04/11/2011 - 19:37
Prior to the enactment and implementation of the federal bankruptcy laws designed to help people keep their homes there were always a few people in trouble and waited too long before seeking bankruptcy legal advice on Chapter 13. These few were faced with the bitter truth that their failure to act promptly resulted in their home being lost to a lender at foreclosure. Fortunately, in the past, this situation only rarely occurred.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 09/10/2009 - 02:33
In the previous Blog I discussed Reaffirmation, which is one of the ways for a debtor in Chapter 7 bankruptcy to keep property secured by a lien such as an automobile. There are alternatives to reaffirmation. There are two ways to eliminate a debt secured by property, one of which is to give the property back to the creditor and the other allows you to keep the property by redeeming it as allowed by the bankruptcy laws.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/30/2009 - 01:53
A reaffirmation agreement is a contract that is used in a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy case that must be approved by the Bankruptcy Judge, in most cases without a court hearing. In general, the purpose of this agreement is to agree to repay what is owed to a creditor, in almost all cases the debt is secured by something that the debtor bought and wishes to keep. A good example would be an automobile. If the Debtor wishes to keep the car and still owes money on the car, he/she must agree to continue to pay for the car.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 08/29/2009 - 01:14
The "Means Test" became law as part of the Bankruptcy Consumer Protection Act Of 2005. The test is mandated by the bankruptcy code including a long, vague and confusing explanation of exactly how to set up the test, which was left to the Office of the United States Trustee. The backbone of the test is derived from the Internal Revenue Code. The test has gone through more than a few changes as people in charge attempted to make the test fit the statute and has been subject to a number of court rulings both by the Bankruptcy Courts and the Courts of Appeal. Two (2) changes that have recen