From the Editor – Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)

FDCPA claim preempted by Bankruptcy Code. Former Chapter 13 debtor filed a FDCPA suit in district court, alleging that the mortgage creditor violated the Act by threatening foreclosure of a debt that had been cured in the plan, with ongoing mortgage payments to be paid after plan completion. The creditor had sent the former debtor notice of arrears, and the court discussed the split of judicial authority on preemption. Citing Simmons v. Roundup Funding, LLC, 622 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2010), the court held that the . . .

It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.

Or Sign In Below:

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

The Dangers of Extending a Plan Too Long – Or Alternatively, Why Take as Little Time as Possible

April 26, 2020

By Joseph A. Bledsoe, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Eastern District of North Carolina (New Bern) Under section 1113(b)(1)(C) of the CARES Act, upon the request of a debtor, and after notice and a hearing, a plan confirmed may be extended up to 7 years from the date the first payment under the original plan came due if...

Members

Bankruptcy Court Broadly Interprets “Engaged in Business” Requirement for Subchapter V Eligibility

May 23, 2021

By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction The Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado ruled recently, in a case styled In re Ikalowych,1 that while eligibility for subchapter V of Chapter 112 requires that 50% of a debtor's debt must arise from commercial or business activities, the debtor was not required to be directly involved...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Watch for Opportunities to Bifurcate Home Mortgage Claims

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

August 21, 2022

Where a Chapter 13 plan treats a claim as secured only by the debtor’s mobile home under § 506 and not real property, the effect of a notice of fees, costs and charges is irrelevant. (Coleman) In re White, 2022 WL 2826531 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. July 19, 2022) Case Summary Shalonda White filed a Chapter 13 petition in July of...

Members

Negotiating Plan Confirmation with Secured Creditors – Issues Involving Balloon Payments and Other Mortgage Loans Subject to Modification Under § 1322(c) – Part 3

November 22, 2020

By David Cox,1 Cox Law Group, PLLC (Lynchburg, VA) III. Providing for the Secured Mortgage Claim, as Modified. A. Does the requirement of § 1325(a)(5)(B)(iii) for equal monthly payments permit the Debtor to propose a balloon payment in the payment of the creditor’s claim? Equal Monthly Payments Required By § 1325(a)(5)(B)(iii) Does NOT Permit Debtor To Propose A Balloon Payment....

Members

From the Editor – Dismissal

August 2, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Marijuana connection required case dismissal. The Chapter 13 debtors owned interests in an entity that was engaged in litigation to recover damages for breach of contract related to growing and selling marijuana, and this connection required dismissal of the case. Continuing administration of the case “would likely require the trustee or the court...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Free Parking

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

January 29, 2023

Percentage fees collected by a Chapter 13 trustee prior to confirmation of a Chapter 13 plan must be returned to the debtor by the trustee if Chapter 13 plan is not confirmed. (Ebel) Goodman v. Doll, 2023 WL 216778 (10th Cir. January 18, 2023) Case Summary Daniel Doll filed Chapter 13 in November of 2017. The debtor complied with 11...

Members

Substantial Contribution Claims

June 9, 2019

By Nicholas Miller, Third-Year Student, University of Texas School of Law, and Madison Haueisen, Second-Year Student, University of Texas School of Law The second issue at hand in this year’s Duberstein moot court problem involves a matter of statutory interpretation—specifically, whether §503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code allows a creditor to recover costs and expenses incurred in making a substantial contribution...

Members

Recent Trends in the Interpretation of Midland v. Johnson and the Applicability of the FDCPA to Bankruptcy Cases

January 3, 2021

By Mark C. Leffler, Boleman Law Firm, PC (Richmond, Hampton, and Va. Beach, VA) Part I: Derby v. Portfolio Recovery Associates Recently, Hon. Keith L. Phillips of the Eastern District of Virginia Bankruptcy Court issued his fourth and final written opinion in the Derby v. Portfolio Recovery Associates adversary proceeding, Adv. Pro. No. 18-03097-KLP, 2020 Bankr. LEXIS 2589 (Bankr. E.D.Va....

Members

The Effect of “Success” (or the Lack of It) on Attorneys’ Fees Part 2: In re Village Apothecary, Inc.

Lawrence R. Ahern, III

October 2, 2022

Introduction In In re Village Apothecary, Inc.,1 the Sixth Circuit recently cut an attorney's fee by half, where the services were not successful. The panel held that the results obtained (or, actually, the lack of results) justified the dramatic reduction of the fees of attorneys for a Chapter 7 trustee. In Part 1, we looked at . . . It...

Members

Can a Secured Claim Still “Ride-Through” Bankruptcy Despite BAPCPA? – Part 1 In re Rhodes Says, “Let Me Count the Ways”

Lawrence R. Ahern, III

January 30, 2022

Background A recent Chapter 7 case out of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California, In re Rhodes,1 addresses reaffirmation in a context that is very significant and should be of interest to all debtor's attorneys. It points out that the "ride-through" of a debtor's secured debt in Chapter 7—which Congress tried to eliminate in 2005—still exists. In...

Members