In re Tibbs, No. 11-18943-EPK, 2012 WL 3800784, at *3–*6 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. Sept. 4, 2012) (Kimball)

Debtors with CMI greater than applicable median family income can modify five-year plan to pay off plan in single payment four years early when modification otherwise satisfies § 1329. One year into five-year plan debtor’s parents agreed to gift the full amount necessary to pay off the plan conditioned on court approval of the modification. “[Section] 1329 does not incorporate § 1325(b), and thus a chapter 13 plan may be modified so that it has a term shorter than the applicable commitment period, so long as the plan as modified satisfies the other requirements of § 1329 . . . . Because § 1329(b)([1]) references only §§ 1322(a), 1322(b), and 1323(c), and the requirements of § 1325(a), it ‘excludes other provisions.’ . . . To determine that § 1329(b)(1) incorporates § 1325(b) because of the introductory text in § 1325(a) referring to § 1325(b) ‘collides with the rule that statutes should be interpreted to avoid redundancies,’ as doing so would cause § 1329(b)(1) to incorporate § 1322(a) twice, once directly and once as a result of reference to § 1322(b) which also refers to § 1322(a). . . . [T]he Bankruptcy Code does not require that a modified plan have a particular minimum term. . . . Congress provided some leeway in how a modification may be structured, and that leeway includes shortening the term to less than the original applicable commitment period or even to a single payment.”

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

AAA_4864
February 13, 2022
(Used with expressed permission from the MI Bankruptcy Journal and the Steven W. Rhodes Consumer Bankruptcy Conference)By Brittani Bushman, Judicial Law Clerk to the Hon. John T. Gregg, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Michigan B. Illustrative Decisions (Minority Approach) The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit recently issued a comprehensive unpublished decision adopting the minority...
Members
November 10, 2019
By William Houston Brown, Editor and Adviser, NACTT Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education, Inc. Several Official and Director’s Forms related to bankruptcy filings are revised and some are new, with some already taking effect on October 1, 2019, others to take effect December 1, 2019, and others taking effect February 19, 2020. Several forms have already been updated on April...
Members
August 30, 2020
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART II – BASICS OF PERFECTION OF SECURITY INTERESTS Introduction Current circumstances, with a pandemic and a recession, portend a wave of bankruptcy filings. In the consumer bankruptcy field, trustees and debtors' counsel often are uncomfortable with the rules in UCC Article 9. In this space, we have previously looked...
Members
bonapfel2
November 9, 2022
Click here to see PDF – SBRA Guide June 2022 Compilation FINAL Click here to see PDF – SBRA May-June Supplement Final
January 10, 2021
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee (Nashville, TN) Other than a recluse without any information of current events, we have been made fully aware of the fact that Congress was fashioning a second stimulus/COVID relief bill. The result is the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021; a massive bill with more than 5,300 pages governing a huge expanse of appropriations,...
Members
May 5, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Background Last year, the Ninth Circuit in In re Taggart1 ruled that an act in violation of the discharge injunction did not empower a court to find a creditor in contempt, if the creditor believed in good faith that the discharge injunction did not apply—even if the creditor's belief was...
Members
March 28, 2021
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Junior mortgage lienholder not affected by modifications of senior mortgage. Under Pennsylvania law, the prepetition modification of terms of the senior mortgage had recapitalized interest and costs already owed but had not created new liabilities. As a result, the junior mortgage holder was not materially prejudiced. The Chapter 13 debtors could avoid the...
Members
March 29, 2020
By Ken Siomos, Staff Attorney for Marsha L. Combs-Skinner (Newman, IL) A small part of the recently passed “Cares Act” is the ability of Chapter 13 debtors experiencing a “material financial hardship” as a result of the covid-19 pandemic to modify their plan to 84 months.i Many Chapter 13 Trustee’s are likely anticipating a series of Chapter 13 Plan defaults...
January 12, 2020
By Herbert L. Beskin, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Western District of Virginia (Charlottesville) The Seventh Circuit thought that it had finished dealing with the intersection of cars, fines, Chapter 13, and the City of Chicago when it rendered its decision earlier in 2019 in “Steenes I.” In re Steenes, 918 F.3d 554 . Alas, it was not to be,...
Members
Jeffrey-Fraser
August 13, 2023
In this brief synopsis, Fraser compares Lac du Flambeauto a case from the Middle District Court of North Carolina and its connection to the automatic stay.
Members

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: