Blogs
A new amendment was recently enacted in Michigan which expands the scope of receivership proceedings, which are a liquidation alternative to bankruptcy. Previously, the receivership statute in Michigan applied only to receiverships over commercial real estate. Now it is applicable to all operating businesses in Michigan, and commercial and industrial loans irrespective of whether real estate collateral is involved. Read More ›
Tags: Alerts and Updates
If you are struggling with debt that you cannot repay, you should look closely into filing bankruptcy. Financial problems and debts are often caused by sudden unemployment, divorce, or emergency medical expenses that you have to pay off. If you are tired of receiving unending creditor notices and calls from individual debt collectors, collection agencies, or credit card companies, consult with reliable bankruptcy attorneys. Aside from helping you understand the essentials of bankruptcy law, they can explain to you how to rebuild and have a fresh start through the bankruptcy process. Good bankruptcy lawyers will work closely with you and help you throughout the entire journey: from learning how to file bankruptcy forms all the way to discharge.
There are different types of bankruptcy. Your assets, and liabilities, types of debt, and future plans will factor into the specific bankruptcy case that you will choose. Filing a petition in bankruptcy will help you resolve most of your debt problems, such as credit card bills, medical bills, and certain tax debt.
There are two common types of personal bankruptcy. Chapter 7 or the liquidation bankruptcy and Chapter or the reorganization bankruptcy. Your bankruptcy attorney can explain the specifics of each. Once your bankruptcy petition is approved by the bankruptcy court, an automatic stay shall be effective immediately. Such bankruptcy protection will prohibit any collection activities by the creditors.
Filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding is a debt elimination plan. It usually takes 90 days to successfully complete this bankruptcy procedure from filing a petition for bankruptcy to a discharged debt. Here, your nonexempt assets will be liquidated, with the list of exemptions varying from state to state.
To be eligible for filing Bankruptcy Chapter 7, you must pass what is called a bankruptcy means test. This will look into your monthly income and total living expenses. The means test will compare your income with the state median income and determine your eligibility as set by bankruptcy rules.
Filing for Bankruptcy under Chapter 13
If a debtor does not qualify to file for Bankruptcy Chapter 7, another option is to pay back your debts through a Chapter 13 repayment plan. Restructuring your debts will help stop foreclosure and wage garnishment while you make monthly payments to creditors. Essentially, after filing Bankruptcy Chapter 13, you will be able to keep your assets while having sufficient time to repay what is owed.
When you file bankruptcy under Chapter 13, you reorganize your finances and propose a payment plan that will allow you to pay all your debts. If you are considering Bankruptcy Chapter 13, note that your debt-repayment plan usually takes three to five years. After which, your unsecured debt may be discharged.
Bankruptcies will protect you from harassment and lawsuits. Consult with a bankruptcy lawyer as soon as you can. They will help you with debt management and in understanding relevant bankruptcy laws. Contact us at the Northwest Debt Relief Law Firm for legal help regarding bankruptcy cases.
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-0{width:100% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;}.fusion-builder-column-0 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 0px !important;margin-right : 1.92%;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 0px !important;margin-left : 1.92%;}@media only screen and (max-width:1024px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-0{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-0 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:850px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-0{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-0 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}.fusion-body .fusion-flex-container.fusion-builder-row-1{ padding-top : 0px;margin-top : 0px;padding-right : 0px;padding-bottom : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;padding-left : 0px;}
The post Rebuilding and Getting a Fresh Start through a Bankruptcy Filing appeared first on Vancouver Bankruptcy Attorney | Northwest Debt Relief Law Firm.
November 5, 2020 – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) filed a complaint against Performance SLC, LLC (PSLC), a California debt-relief business focused on federal student loan debt; Performance Settlement, LLC (PSettlement), a California debt-settlement company; and Daniel Crenshaw, the owner and CEO of the two companies. The Bureau alleges that PSLC and Crenshaw charged illegal advance fees in violation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) to student loan borrowers seeking to obtain loan consolidation, loan forgiveness, or income-driven repayment plans for their federal student loans, and that PSLC failed to make required disclosures to certain consumers in violation of the TSR. The Bureau also alleges that PSettlement and Crenshaw used deceptive tactics in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA) in order to induce consumers to sign up for PSettlement’s services.
The Bureau’s complaint, which was filed in federal district court for the Central District of California, alleges that from 2015 through the present, PSLC charged consumers illegal upfront fees by using telemarketing campaigns to convince thousands of consumers to sign up for services to assist them in obtaining loan consolidation, loan forgiveness, or income-driven repayment plans from the U.S. Department of Education (ED). Consumers would pay between $1,000 and $1,450 in fees to PSLC for it to file paperwork with ED, even though student loan borrowers can do this themselves for free. Under the TSR, it is illegal to request or receive any fees for debt-relief services sold through telemarketing before the terms of the debt are altered or settled, and the consumer has made at least one payment under the newly altered debt. The Bureau alleges that the PSLC and Crenshaw violated the TSR because consumers were charged at or just after enrollment, before the terms of the debts were altered. The Bureau also alleges that PSLC had some consumers pay this prohibited upfront fee through high-interest financing from a third party. Some consumers paid a portion or all of their fee into a trust account, but the complaint alleges that PSLC failed to provide them with disclosures required by the TSR.
The complaint also alleges that PSettlement and Crenshaw, from as early as 2019, engaged in deceptive acts and practices in violation of the CFPA by representing to consumers that PSettlement, a debt-settlement company that does not make loans, had considered and rejected those consumers for personal loans to induce them to sign up for PSettlement’s debt-relief services. Finally, the Bureau alleges that Crenshaw substantially assisted PSLC in requesting or receiving fees illegally and PSettlement in engaging in deceptive acts and practices.
The complaint seeks redress to consumers, injunctive relief, and the imposition of civil money penalties against the defendants.
The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have violated the law.
The Bureau’s complaint is available at: https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_performance-slc-llc-performance-settlement-llc-daniel-crenshaw_complaint_2020-11.pdf
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 0px !important;margin-right : 1.92%;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 0px !important;margin-left : 1.92%;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-1{margin-top:15px!important;margin-bottom:0px!important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-1{margin-top:10px!important;margin-bottom:10px!important;}}MUSINGS BY DIANE:Yet another student loan “workout” company has been charged with receiving illegal fees and engaging in deceptive acts and practices. In this case approximately $9.2 million in illegal upfront fees. I feel bad for the law enforcement agencies seeing this same outrageous and fraudulent actions again and again. But I really get upset at the pain and suffering these horrible people are suffering on the innocent borrower who is trying to workout payments on their student loans. I know too well how how this causes unnecessary stress – resulting in difficulty at work and home, physical illness and a general distrust of the entire student loan system.
@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-2{margin-top:0px!important;margin-bottom:6px!important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-2{margin-top:10px!important;margin-bottom:10px!important;}}– Diane L. Drain.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-2{width:100% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;}.fusion-builder-column-2 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 30px !important;margin-right : 1.92%;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 45px !important;margin-left : 1.92%;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-2{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-2 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-2{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-2 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}.fusion-body .fusion-flex-container.fusion-builder-row-2{ padding-top : 0px;margin-top : 0px;padding-right : 0px;padding-bottom : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;padding-left : 0px;}.fusion-button.button-1 {border-radius:10px;}.fusion-button.button-1.button-3d{-webkit-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);-moz-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);}.button-1.button-3d:active{-webkit-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);-moz-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);}Click here for steps to your free bankruptcy consultation
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-4{width:25% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;}.fusion-builder-column-4 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 0px !important;margin-right : 10px;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 0px !important;margin-left : 10px;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-4{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-4 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-4{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-4 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}
- Don’t Fall Into a Student Loan Relief Scam
- Seniors Saddled with Student Loans
- Beware of Student Loan Debt Relief Scams
- Do Student Loans Debts Die With You?
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-5{width:75% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;}.fusion-builder-column-5 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 15px !important;margin-right : 10px;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 15px !important;margin-left : 10px;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-5{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-5 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-5{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-5 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}.fusion-body .fusion-flex-container.fusion-builder-row-4{ padding-top : 0px;margin-top : 5;padding-right : 0px;padding-bottom : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;padding-left : 0px;}
The post Performance SLC Accused of Charging Student Loan Borrowers Illegal Fees appeared first on Diane L. Drain - Phoenix Arizona Bankruptcy Attorney.
The Nebraska bankruptcy court discharged student loan debts for a 50-year-old debtor raising a disabled grandson. See In re Mudd. The Court overruled the Department of Education’s argument that a debtor must work two jobs to meet her burden of showing undue hardship.
In discharging the student loans the Court pointed out several factors:
- The debtor has never earned more than $13 per hour.
- Prospects of higher income in the future was speculative.
- The debtor rented a single bedroom apartment that she shared with her disabled 17-year-old grandson.
- The debtor was eligible for a zero-payment Income Based Repayment plan with the Department of Education.
- The debtor failed to renew the income-based program for no apparent reason.
- The debtor had no retirement savings, pension accounts or investments of any kind.
- The debtor had recently purchased a 2016 Nissan Rogue with payments of $414.65 per month.
- The debtor suffered from diabetes, high cholesterol, gastro reflux disease, menopause, severe allergies and a torn rotator cuff.
- Between 2006 and 2015 she received 26 student loans .
- She appeared to owe in excess of $75,000 of student loans.
- At the time of trial the debtor worked 40 hours per week earning $12 per hour and worked a part-time job as a FedEx package handler.
- Medical bills and garnishments were the immediate cause of the bankruptcy filing.
TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES:
The court applied the “Totality of Circumstances Test” used in the 8th Circuit in reviewing the application. Three factors are considered:
- The debtor’s past, present and reasonably reliable future financial resources.
- A calculation of the reasonable living expenses of the debtor and her dependents.
- Any other relevant facts and circumstances.
A long review of the debtor’s income earning record indicated that this debtor was already earning at her peak capacity and that it was doubtful and speculative that her income would increase substantially beyond its present level. The debtor showed good faith in working a full-time job and part-time job to pay for basic living expenses.
The court also agreed that the debtor’s living expenses were reasonable.
MUST A DEBTOR WORK TWO JOBS TO DISCHARGE STUDENT LOANS?
The Nebraska bankruptcy court scoffed at the notion that a debtor must work two jobs before they can show good faith in discharging student loans.
At trial, DOE insinuated that Mudd must maintain two jobs to meet her burden of
showing undue hardship. It asserted that, even if Mudd obtains a higher-paying
customer service representative position where she “only” worked 40 hours per week,
she “would still have the ability in terms of time in your schedule and otherwise to work
a second job.”
A 50-year-old debtor with numerous health problems earning $12 per hour who supports a disabled grandchild must work a second job to show good faith before the court could consider issuing a hardship discharge of student loans? That was the implied argument of the US Department of Education attorneys.
WHY WAS THIS A TOUGH DECISION FOR THE COURT?
I think most observers would agree with the court’s opinion in this case. It is extremely doubtful that a 50-year-old debtor with health problems will see an increase of income. In fact, the very sad truth is that all workers over the age of 50 have a bullseye affixed to them for “strategic layoffs.” Older workers impose a burden on corporate health insurance premiums and younger managers typically feel uneasy managing older workers. When you hit 50 in America’s workforce, they want you gone.
But why did the court have to suffer through a 28-page opinion? Was there any real question of a hardship? Even if the debtor was not supporting a disabled grandson, wasn’t the fact that she was 50 years old with health problems and no savings, pension, home or prospects of higher wages more than enough to justify a hardship discharge? Why did the court struggle to balance the equities in this case?
The legal standards regarding student loan discharges were created when such loans could be discharged five years after they became due. And since five years is a very short period of time, the standards to qualify for a special “hardship discharge” prior to the running of 5 years were very high.
But when the 2005 bankruptcy amendments were passed to eliminate student loan discharges entirely except for the hardship cases, the courts failed to update their standards. Courts continued to apply the very tough standards applied when discharges could automatically be granted after a student loan was five years old, and this is an error that our appeals courts have lacked the courage to address.
As I write this blog post, protestors have stormed the nation’s capital to block the vote confirming the election of President Biden and in Georgia the US Senate elections may usher in serious bankruptcy reform legislation. We may see bankruptcy reform laws passed to finally deal with crushing student loan debts. But legislation is tricky and slow, and it is time the courts update the standards applied to define what an undue hardship means for debtors entering into their final working years with no savings or economic stability.
Image courtesy of Flickr and Bradley Weber
This website is designed to provide to the public information concerning our services, to collect information from persons interested in contacting us to obtain those services, and to enable our lawyers to contact potential clients. This privacy policy (“Policy”) applies only to the online collection of information from users of this website. If you contact […]
From our initial consultation, we were impressed by Diane’s legal knowledge and compassionate nature
“From our initial consultation, we were impressed by Diane’s legal knowledge and compassionate nature,” C.R.
My elderly parents were experiencing financial difficulty due to dealings with an unscrupulous timeshare company. Their only option was to file bankruptcy. While searching for a bankruptcy attorney, we came across the law office of Diane Drain who had excellent reviews.
From our initial consultation, we were impressed by Diane’s legal knowledge and compassionate nature. Although the process was difficult and time-consuming, the communication, help, and support we received from Diane and her legal assistant, Jay, was exceptional. They provided us with clear explanations on what to expect during each step of the bankruptcy process so there weren’t any surprises.
If you’re considering filing bankruptcy and need an experienced, knowledgeable, and compassionate attorney, we highly recommend Diane Drain. She and Jay are wonderful to work with!
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-0{width:100% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;}.fusion-builder-column-0 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 0px !important;margin-right : 1.92%;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 0px !important;margin-left : 1.92%;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-0{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-0 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-0{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-0 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}.fusion-body .fusion-flex-container.fusion-builder-row-1{ padding-top : 0px;margin-top : 0px;padding-right : 0px;padding-bottom : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;padding-left : 0px;}
The post From our initial consultation, we were impressed by Diane’s legal knowledge and compassionate nature appeared first on Diane L. Drain - Phoenix Arizona Bankruptcy Attorney.
FICO and Personal Bankruptcy
When clients contact me for a consultation with respect to a personal bankruptcy filing, they will often ask how this could impact their FICO score. My reply is that the impact of a filing on their FICO score is of secondary importance; how to rehabilitate their credit after filing, is of primary importance.A wonderful article regarding one’s FICO score was recently published at Groovy Post and can be found at: https://www.groovypost.com/explainer/what-is-a-fico-score-why-important/...Reader’s with questions regarding FICO should review this post.Generally, a bankruptcy filing results from a “triggering event” such as being sued, losing a lawsuit and being subject to a judgment, failure to make a payment on credit cards, or defaulting on car lease payments. A person contemplating a bankruptcy filing usually has a FICO score of 550 to 650 and is unable to get credit.Accordingly, a chapter 7 bankruptcy filing would not lower the FICO score since it is already low. However, a chapter 7 bankruptcy filing can increase a person’s ability to obtain credit. Yes, let me repeat, a chapter 7 filing can make a person more credit-worthy. Why? For two reasons: 1) one can only file for chapter 7 bankruptcy once every eight years and 2) the bankruptcy filing cleans up one’s personal balance sheet: liabilities are discharged in and exempt assets are kept.Banks are aware of these factors and are thus more likely to loan money to a debtor after a bankruptcy filing with credit rehabilitation than before a filing.So how does a debtor rehabilitate their credit? 1) By getting a secured credit card, charging the card and repaying it, and finally asking the bank or credit card company to increase their credit limit. 2) By working, reducing their expenses, and saving as much money as possible.For these reasons, filing for bankruptcy and rehabilitating one’s credit is more important than the impact of chapter 7 bankruptcy on one’s FICO score.People with questions regarding FICO and credit rehabilitation should contact:Jim Shenwick, [email protected], (212) 541-6224
The FTC alleged that Midwest Recovery, and owners Brandon M. Tumber, Kenny W. Conway and Joseph H. Smith, collected more than $24 million from consumers on such debts, largely by debt parking.
What is “debt parking”, also known as “passive debt collection?”
According to an article by the Federal Trade Commission “FTC” – debt parking can result in a consumer only finding out that a purported debt exists when his or her credit report is accessed in connection with buying a car or home, opening a credit card, or seeking employment. While the debts may not be valid, consumers can feel pressured to pay them off.
“The defendants parked fake or questionable debts on people’s credit reports and then waited for them to notice the damage when they were trying to get a loan or a job,” said Andrew Smith, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The defendants used this illegal ‘debt parking’ to coerce people to pay debts they didn’t owe or didn’t recognize.”
80 and 97 percent of the debts it investigated were inaccurate or not valid
The FTC’s complaint alleges that Midwest Recovery received thousands of complaints each month about the purported debts from consumers, with the company itself finding that between 80 and 97 percent of the debts it investigated were inaccurate or not valid. In addition to payday lending debts, the complaint notes that the company parked significant quantities of medical debt, which is often a source of confusion and uncertainty for consumers because of the complex, opaque system of insurance coverage and cost sharing.
In one example from the complaint, a consumer was told when applying for a mortgage that an outstanding $1,500 medical debt placed on his credit report by Midwest Recovery had lowered his credit score and jeopardized his purchase. The consumer contacted the hospital to whom the debt was owed, who told him that he only owed an $80 co-pay. In spite of that, Midwest refused to remove the $1,500 debt and threatened the consumer with a lawsuit if he didn’t pay.
The FTC’s complaint alleges that the company and its owners, Brandon M. Tumber, Kenny W. Conway, and Joseph H. Smith, violated the FTC Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and the FCRA’s Furnisher Rule.
Under the terms of the settlement, Midwest Recovery and its owners will be prohibited from debt parking and pursuing consumers for alleged debts without a reasonable basis. The settlement also requires Midwest Recovery and Tumber to contact credit reporting agencies and request all debts reported by the company be deleted from consumers’ credit reports.
The settlement includes a monetary judgment of $24.3 million
The settlement includes a monetary judgment of $24.3 million, which is partially suspended based on an inability to pay. Tumber and the company will be required to pay $56,748, and Tumber will also be required to sell his stake in another debt collection company and provide the proceeds from that sale to the FTC. In addition, Midwest Recovery will be required to surrender all of its remaining assets. If the defendants are found to have misrepresented their ability to pay, the full amount of the judgment would become immediately payable.
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 0px !important;margin-right : 1.92%;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 0px !important;margin-left : 1.92%;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-1{margin-top:15px!important;margin-bottom:0px!important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-1{margin-top:10px!important;margin-bottom:10px!important;}}MUSINGS BY DIANE:Has anyone ever contacted you demanding payment for a debt you don’t owe? My guess is ‘yes’. Not only does this happen all the time, it is a something some debt collectors set up on purpose. They report a false claim and then wait for you to check your credit report. Only then do you take action to remove the fake report – which will take several months, if at all. Unfortunately, you do not discover that false claim until you need a clean credit report in order to purchase that new home or car. Which means you need that report to be clean now, not several months from now. That results in many people paying to remove the false report, which is exactly what the company reporting the fake debt wanted. This is somewhat like rewarding the thief for robbing your home.
The moral – ALWAYS pull your credit reports at least once a year in order to determine if someone is parking a false or misleading debt. You can do this for free at AnnualCreditReport.com.
@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-2{margin-top:0px!important;margin-bottom:6px!important;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-title.fusion-title-2{margin-top:10px!important;margin-bottom:10px!important;}}– Diane L. Drain.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-2{width:100% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;}.fusion-builder-column-2 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 30px !important;margin-right : 1.92%;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 45px !important;margin-left : 1.92%;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-2{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-2 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-2{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-2 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}.fusion-body .fusion-flex-container.fusion-builder-row-2{ padding-top : 0px;margin-top : 0px;padding-right : 0px;padding-bottom : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;padding-left : 0px;}.fusion-button.button-1 {border-radius:10px;}.fusion-button.button-1.button-3d{-webkit-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);-moz-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);}.button-1.button-3d:active{-webkit-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);-moz-box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);box-shadow: inset 0px 1px 0px #fff,0px 5px 0px #003d00,1px 7px 7px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.3);}Click here for steps to your free bankruptcy consultation
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-4{width:25% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;}.fusion-builder-column-4 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 0px !important;margin-right : 10px;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 0px !important;margin-left : 10px;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-4{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-4 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-4{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-4 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}
- COVID-19 Scams – Warning from FTC
- 20% of Consumers have Credit Reporting Errors
- Collection Fraud – You Cannot be Arrested for Not Paying Your Credit Cards
- Warning – Debt Collectors ‘Friending’ you on Facebook Make Public Demand for Payment
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-5{width:75% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;}.fusion-builder-column-5 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 15px !important;margin-right : 10px;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 15px !important;margin-left : 10px;}@media only screen and (max-width:980px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-5{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-5 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}@media only screen and (max-width:640px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-5{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-5 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 10px;margin-left : 10px;}}.fusion-body .fusion-flex-container.fusion-builder-row-4{ padding-top : 0px;margin-top : 5;padding-right : 0px;padding-bottom : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;padding-left : 0px;}
The post Midwest Recovery Systems Received Millions Collecting Fake Debts appeared first on Diane L. Drain - Phoenix Arizona Bankruptcy Attorney.
A bankruptcy proceeding has pros and cons, be it a Chapter 7 liquidation or a Chapter 13 reorganization. While filing bankruptcy can help, keep in mind that not all types of debt can be wiped out when you file for bankruptcy. Bankruptcy proceedings can wipe out your credit card debt, medical debt, and certain tax debt but not alimony, child support, student loans, and other secured debt. Below are other things that will help you see how declaring bankruptcy may or may not help with your financial problems.
How can a bankruptcy petition help you?
- If you are dealing with debt from credit card companies or medical bills, consider filing a petition in bankruptcy. When you file bankruptcy under Chapter 7, the outstanding balance in your credit card is considered unsecured debt. This can be part of a bankruptcy discharge. You would not have to pay back your creditor or lender if what you owe is considered as a discharged debt.
While you will have to pay off your unsecured debts in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case, you will have a longer period to repay. Pursuant to bankruptcy law, your payment plan will likely last for three or five years. Furthermore, a portion of your unsecured debt may eventually be discharged by the bankruptcy court.
- While a Chapter 7 petition for bankruptcy cannot prevent the repossession of nonexempt property by a secured creditor, most of your personal property would be exempt. Bankruptcy filings must be pursuant to state law particularly in this aspect. Note that bankruptcy exemptions vary from state to state.
- Most bankruptcy cases cannot have your student loan debt eliminated. However, if you are struggling financially and are planning on filing for bankruptcy, your student loan may be forgiven if you can establish what is called undue hardship.
- Even if you filed for bankruptcy, criminal fines and penalties will likely not be forgiven. Debts from DUI-related deaths or injuries will also remain even after a Bankruptcy Chapter 7 is dismissed.
- An automatic stay is essentially bankruptcy protection from creditor harassment and collection activities. Aside from protecting you from debt collectors, bankruptcies and automatic stay can help stop foreclosure or repossession and can even help stop wage garnishment.
Seek legal help from an experienced bankruptcy attorney early on. This will allow you to learn more about the bankruptcy process and how to file properly. Talk to a bankruptcy lawyer from our firm who will help you get a fresh start and rebuild your financial future. Call us at the Northwest Debt Relief Law Firm for bankruptcy information and legal assistance.
.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;margin-top : 0px;margin-bottom : 20px;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {padding-top : 0px !important;padding-right : 0px !important;margin-right : 1.92%;padding-bottom : 0px !important;padding-left : 0px !important;margin-left : 1.92%;}@media only screen and (max-width:1024px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}@media only screen and (max-width:850px) {.fusion-body .fusion-builder-column-1{width:100% !important;order : 0;}.fusion-builder-column-1 > .fusion-column-wrapper {margin-right : 1.92%;margin-left : 1.92%;}}.fusion-body .fusion-flex-container.fusion-builder-row-2{ padding-top : 0px;margin-top : 0px;padding-right : 0px;padding-bottom : 0px;margin-bottom : 0px;padding-left : 0px;}
The post Pros and Cons of a Bankruptcy Filing appeared first on Vancouver Bankruptcy Attorney | Northwest Debt Relief Law Firm.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has introduced a law to radically change the consumer bankruptcy practice entitled the Consumer Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2020.
This revolutionary document would make dramatic changes to bankruptcy practice.
- Chapter 7 and 13 is eliminated and replaced with a single system called Chapter 10.
- Student Loan debts become dischargeable just like any other debt.
- Discharges are issued immediately upon confirmation of payment plans instead of waiting until all payments are made.
- Discharges would be issued without the requirement of a payment plan (what Chapter 7 currently offers) to families whose income is less than 130% of the median income for their state. For a Nebraska family of 4, the current median income level is $96,749, so debtor’s whose family income is less than $125,773 would be eligible for immediate discharge in Chapter 10. For a single debtor the income cutoff would be $66,101.
- Credit counseling requirements are eliminated.
- Past due rent payments are discharged but landlords may not terminate the lease as long as future rent is paid on time.
- Telephone/Zoom Court hearings. Debtors would no longer have to attend the required trustee meeting in person and the meeting must not conflict with a debtor’s work schedule.
- Spending habits become irrelevant: Bankruptcy courts would no longer focus on how a debtor spends their money. Rather, median income levels would determine the amount paid back to unsecured creditors with few debtors having to pay back anything at all.
- Three types of payments plans are created: Repayment Plans for unsecured debts. Residence Plans for delinquent mortgage payments. Property Plans for non-mortgage secured debts, like cars or furniture. A debtor may be enrolled in three plans at the same time.
- Attorney fees may be paid after the case is filed, but attorneys may not sell their unpaid fees for quick cash.
- Trustees may not dismiss unpaid cases but rather must enforce a lien. In current chapter 13 cases, a debtor who fails to pay monthly payments may have their case tossed out of court without a discharge. New Chapter 10 instead issues an immediate discharge upon plan confirmation and gives the trustee a judgment lien that the trustee may use to enforce the plan, which basically requires the trustee to sue and garnish the debtor.
- Federal property exemption laws would apply to all cases and allow an individual to shield $30,000 of personal property from creditors.
The Chapter 10 proposal is revolutionary to the core. This is a radical manifesto that would rip through consumer bankruptcy practice. And, unfortunately, because of its radicalness, it probably has zero chance of ever being enacted into law and squanders the current opportunity to achieve real bankruptcy reform.
What is also clear about this proposal which was endorsed by 74 law school bankruptcy professors, is that it rejected any input from those professionals, judges, trustees and attorneys engaged in consumer bankruptcy practice.
There are so many problems with this proposed law that it is hard to begin. Here is a short sampling of some of the obvious defects of this political manifesto.
- Student Loans. Is it really wise or fair to allow students to discharge their entire student loan debt two seconds after they graduate college? Wouldn’t it be wiser to delay eligibility for student loan discharges for a period of 10 or more years? I cannot see how voters would approve of allowing privileged college students to immediately discharge taxpayer subsidized education without making any effort to repay a single dime of debt.
- 130% of Median Income Qualification. Under current consumer bankruptcy law, the court may require a debtor who clearly can afford to repay some or all of their debt to enter a payment plan. Not so with chapter 10. Under chapter 10 we no longer review a debtor’s spending choices or ability to pay. Rather, we only require debtors with income over 130% of median income levels to pay back anything to unsecured creditors. Under this rule the vast majority of higher income debtors who currently must offer payment to creditors would immediately qualify for a no payment case. Would voters approve of that change?
- Unpaid Rent Dischargeable. Chapter 10 proposes that past due rent be dischargeable but that landlords be forced to continue the lease as long as future rent is paid on time. But doesn’t this just encourage debtors who must file bankruptcy to stop paying rent knowing that they can stop evictions and skip paying past due rent when the bankruptcy is filed? Will this cause landlords to increase the amount of security deposits charged to all renters?
- Mass Resignation of Trustees. I would anticipate that the majority of trustees now serving in chapter 7 and 13 cases would consider resignation if chapter 10 were passed. Why? Chapter 13 trustees who mange payment plans could no longer dismiss cases for nonpayment but would rather be required to enforce a judicial lien through garnishments. Is that feasible? Probably not. Chapter 7 trustees could almost never claim property under chapter 10 since new federal exemptions would protect almost every debtor’s property. And since trustee meetings must now be scheduled when they do not interfere with a debtor’s work schedule, do we really expect trustees to conduct meetings during evening hours or weekends? This is madness!
- Attorney Fees. The chapter 10 proposal to allow attorneys to collect fees after this case is filed is sensible, but this proposal prohibits attorneys from selling their unpaid fees to investors. What these law professors do not seem to understand is that this proposal changes nothing since the risk of not being paid has not changed. Bankruptcy attorneys are not going to start filing complicated cases on an installment plan just because they are allowed to. Only the most financially stable debtors will be able to take advantage of this change, but for lower-income debtors the attorneys will still have to collect all their fees up front since the risk of not being paid is not alleviated. That is why allowing attorneys to factor their receivables is actually a good thing for lower-income debtors since it encourages attorneys to file cases for little money down if a market for their unpaid receivables exist. Rather than outlawing the selling of receivables the better option is to allow the US Trustee and the courts to review the factoring arrangement for reasonableness. When law professors and lawmakers fail to gather input from those who actually prepare cases, this is the type of misguided legislation that results.
- Enforcement of Payment Plans. Under the current payment plans offered in Chapter 13, the failure to make payments will result in a dismissal of the case. Not so with Chapter 10. Rather, the Discharge of debts is immediate upon plan confirmation and the bankruptcy trustee is given a Judgment Lien to enforce payment. This is completely unrealistic. Bankruptcy trustees are not going to take the extraordinary steps to garnish debtors who fail to make the bankruptcy payment. Honest but unfortunate debtors lose jobs and relocate frequently. Tracking down judgment debtors is a difficult and expensive process. Bankruptcy trustees depend on a steady flow of payments to fund their office, and taking away the power to dismiss cases will result in a devastating cash flow crisis that will cause trustees to resign from office at alarming rates. The only reason a majority of debtors make the monthly bankruptcy payment is the fear that a dismissed case will allow creditors to resume garnishments and foreclosures. Take away that fear and payments to trustees will slow overnight.
- $30,000 Property Exemption. The proposal to give every debtor a $30,000 property exemption will virtually eliminate a claim of assets in the vast majority of cases. As a result, income for bankruptcy trustee’s will decline substantially. Several chapter 7 trustees tell me that their profits have shrunk considerably over the years due to greater reporting duties imposed on them and from greater property exemption laws approved by state legislatures. Some trustee’s say they make little to no income from their trustee duties and they already question why they keep the job.
- Remote 341 Hearings. I fully endorse the concept of making remote Section 341 meetings with the trustee permanent. Since COVID-19 these hearings are currently conducted via telephone conference calls, and the process is working well. However, the new requirement that the hearings not conflict with a debtor’s work schedule is just nonsense. These hearings only take a few minutes to complete and the debtor is given a month advance notice of the hearing date. Many debtors complete these hearings on a cell phone by taking a half-hour break from work. If necessary the hearing are rescheduled if the debtor is not able to attend. To require that trustees conduct meetings when the debtor is off work in the evening or on weekends is insane. Trustees will resign before they agree to this.
- Post-Petition Mortgage Payments. When a debtor falls behind on mortgage payments after a case is filed, the bank will normally file a Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay when three or four payments are missed. The proposed Chapter 10 law says that creditors may not take advantage of state law enforcement procedures until a post-petition mortgage payment is 120 days past due. So does this mean that the automatic bankruptcy stay is automatically lifted when payments are 120 days past due? If so, this represents a great weakening of the protection to homeowners. In chapter 13 cases the banks don’t even request relief until a loan is 60 to 120 days delinquent, and when that happens we routinely work out payment plans to cure the default over 6 months. Under Chapter 10, however, no such repayment agreements are available if the bank just waits until an account is 120 days past due. This is less protection.
- Median Income Calculations. Chapter 10 still requires debtors to submit six months of paystubs and other income verification documents to their attorneys to determine their median income level. What??? This is horrible. Do these law professors have any idea how difficult it is to obtain six months of financial records? This is what the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 imposed and it directly resulted in the cost of bankruptcy cases to double and triple. It is so obvious that the writers of this legislation have never actually prepared a bankruptcy case. Why is it necessary for a minimum wage worker to submit a six-month income calculation when it is perfectly obvious from their last paystub and tax return that that only earn minimum wage? Such debtors do not keep paystubs and they change jobs frequently. The nightmare of collecting income documents stays the same under this “reform” bill.
I remember preparing bankruptcy cases prior to the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005. Bankruptcy fees were cheap and we didn’t have to collect six months of paystubs or bank statements or tax returns. But we did have to prove up on every case and explain how we determined a debtor’s income. Bankruptcy trustees did a good job of reviewing monthly budgets and they frequently pushed higher income debtors out of chapter 7 if they felt a payment could be made to creditors.
In some ways the practice before 2005 was too lax. It does make sense to require debtors to submit a recent paycheck stub, tax return and bank statement to the trustees for review. It does make sense to impose a duty on bankruptcy attorneys to verify the accuracy of the petition they file. Some reforms were overdue, but the reform act of 2005 was 99% punitive and unwise. The law was so poorly drafted that it took a decade of court appeals to figure out what it even said.
The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2020 is some of the worst written law I have ever read. This legislation would destroy the current system and lead to mass confusion and trustee resignation. The drafters of the legislation seem not to see how vague and uncertain it’s provisions are and this will lead to massive litigation to figure out what he darn document says, just like the 2005 reform bill did. But what is worse, 40 years of case law interpreting chapter 13 cases will be through into the trash and courts will struggle to interpret the mechanics of the new law.
Bankruptcy attorneys will, however, greatly benefit from the confusion this new law will usher in. Bankruptcy fees will soar with the complexity of these cases while immediate discharge orders will make them seem like magicians to their clients who are ostensibly immune from not making required payments. This law is nothing less than a radical economic manifesto that no sensible Congress should ever consider enacting into law.
Image courtesy of Flickr and Mark Ramsay