Spending every dollar they make, and then some, is often how our Chapter 13 clients got into financial trouble. Yet Chapter 13, as practiced, validates the practice of continuing to spend 100% of each month’s income during the life of the plan. In doing so, we, as a society, squander the chance to use Chapter 13 to teach new budgeting...
Critical Case Comment: Bourff v Rubin Lublin
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Middle District of TN
Bourff v Rubin Lublin, LLC, 2012 WL 971800 (Eleventh Cir, March 15, 2012) (Per Curiam)
A law firm, filing a debt verification letter to a consumer to collect on a mortgage obligation, violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act when it wrongly identifies the default servicer as the “creditor” in the communication.
Case Summary
Mr. Bourff borrowed $195,000 from America’s Wholesale Lender which debt was secured by real property. When he failed to make payment on . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Brace & Beyond: Joint Tenancy & Transmutation
From the Editor – Discharge
Is Voluntary Dismissal of a Chapter 13 Case an Absolute Right?
Assessable Yet Not Assessed Taxes Could Cost You a Malpractice Claim
Yet Another Arrow in the Quiver of the “Less Than Honest Debtor”?
Why Creditors Should Get Less in Chapter 13
Can Good Facts Also Make Bad Law? Finality of Orders in Bankruptcy Revisited after Ritzen Group
Why Junk the Whole System When Minor Remedies Would Suffice?
Supreme Court on Statute of Limitations Under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
Taking Care of Business: Recordkeeping for Small Businesses