Yet Another Pre-Discharge Requirement in Chapter 13 – the Section 1328 Certificate

By Jonathan Ginsberg, Atlanta Bankruptcy Attorney

The Bankruptcy Code’s requirement that debtors obtain and file both a pre-filing credit counseling certificate and a post filing financial management course certificate have been rightly criticized as ineffective, time consuming and an unnecessary financial burden on people who do not have a lot of extra money.

In my Atlanta area Chapter 13 practice in particular the sentiment I hear expressed most is one of confusion.  The two months between filing and confirmation are filled with phone calls, document production, amendments, payments to the trustee and anxiety waiting to hear if the trustee will withdraw his objections to confirmation.  Once their cases are confirmed, my clients often have little enthusiasm to spend another $50 and another two to three hours attending a financial management course.

Now, there is an additional pre-discharge requirement in the Northern District of Georgia that adds yet another administrative burden on debtors – the Section 1328 certificate.

This certificate, which must be signed by the debtor and filed by counsel, asserts under penalty of perjury that the debtor is or is not current with all domestic obligations – child support and/or alimony, and that the debtor has or has not received a discharge in a prior bankruptcy case that would make him ineligible for a discharge in this case.

If you are a Chapter 13 debtor and you do not fill out and submit this form, you will not get your Chapter 13 discharge.

In my view, this 1328 certificate obligation is yet another unnecessary and time wasting requirement that unnecessarily increases the cost and complexity of personal bankruptcy.  The statement regarding prior discharges is duplicative of the assertion that every debtor makes when he files his case – previous cases filed within the 8 years are already disclosed.  Now, before discharge, we want debtors to promise again that they are eligible for discharge?

As far as the promises regarding child support and alimony – the Code already makes these debts non-dischargeable and it appears to me that denying a delinquent non-custodial parent the opportunity to get rid of other debts would make it less likely rather than more likely that child support payments will be made.

It seems that this requirement like so many others in the Code are intended to address issues unrelated to the core issue in bankruptcy – can this person pay his debt or not?  Bloating the Code with public policy concerns not related to economics just adds complexity and cost to a system that is already too complicated.

What do you think?  Should Congress use the Bankruptcy Code to further policy goals unrelated to a debtor’s capacity to pay back debt?

Jonathan GinsbergJonathan Ginsberg – has represented Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 debtors in the Atlanta area for over 20 years.  A graduate of Tulane University College of Law, Jonathan regularly teaches continuing legal education classes for Georgia lawyers about consumer bankruptcy and Social Security disability.  He is also a faculty member at Solo Practice University, an on-line law practice development resource for attorneys entering private law practice.  Jonathan has published the Atlanta bankruptcy blog since 2005 and is a founding member of the Bankruptcy Law Network.

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

February 17, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART II: More Supreme Court Action on Arbitration Introduction Click here for Part I Click here for Part III Click here for Part IV What is the effect of an . . . It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members....
October 27, 2019
By Alexander Schmidt1, Law Clerk, and The Honorable John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Toledo) You have never heard – or seen – the Monster Mash. What have you heard, is a song ABOUT the Monster Mash. Let that sink in for a minute. Inevitably, that leads to the obvious question: What facts...
October 13, 2019
IRS officials announced on 10/8/19 that a new payment option has been added to the private debt collection program to make it easier for those who owe to pay their tax debts. Taxpayers now can choose the convenient option of a preauthorized direct debit to make one payment or a series of payments toward their federal tax debt. With direct...
July 28, 2019
Tiffany M. Cornejo was appointed as the Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the District of New Mexico on December 1, 2017. She took the reins from retiring Kelley Skehen. Ms. Cornejo received her Bachelor of Science in Journalism (B.S.J.) degree at the University of Kansas in Lawrence in 2002 and remained there to obtain her Juris Doctor in 2005. She...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
June 12, 2022
A new day is coming to high debt borrowers seeking to file Chapter 13 but confounded by the debt limits imposed by 11 U.S.C. § 109(e). Although debt limits have been increasing since the effective date of the Code in 1979, consumer debts have been increasing at a far more rapid rate. Starting in 2009, when the housing crisis first...
June 30, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction In In re Fulton,1 the Seventh Circuit has restated its position on passive violation of the automatic stay, holding that failure by the City of Chicago to turn over impounded vehicles after the owners' bankruptcy filings violated Bankruptcy Code sections 362 and 542. Fulton – Background and Ruling The...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
November 20, 2022
A golf cart is a motor vehicle and may be exempted by a Chapter 7 debtor under state law. (Loyd) In re Smith, 2022 WL 3023209 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. July 28, 2022) Case Summary Bobby Smith filed a Chapter 7 petition and listed his golf cart as an exempt asset under Oklahoma law because it was a “motor vehicle.” The...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
It is incumbent upon nonbankruptcy attorneys, including personal injury attorneys, to verify on PACER that their client is not a debtor and that the cause of action as to which they represent their client is not property of the estate; failure to obtain approval of the bankruptcy court for representing a debtor or settlement of a personal injury action is...
September 29, 2019
By The Honorable Guy R. Humphrey, Southern District of Ohio It is with heavy hearts that we in Dayton, Ohio say our farewells to Jeff Kellner as our Chapter 13 Trustee. Jeff will be concluding his duties as the Trustee on September 30th and handing the reins over to John Jansing on October 1st. Listing Jeff’s contributions to the bankruptcy...
June 7, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Hardship discharge denied. Section 1328(b)’s requirements for hardship discharge are conjunctive and failure to satisfy any one of three conditions results in denial. Reviewing judicial decisions on requirements of the statute, the court considered “the extent of a debtor’s accountability and degree of control; the substantiality and foreseeability of the changed circumstances at...