Mortgage loan servicer violated mortgage agreement with debtor, the automatic stay, the confirmation order and Rule 3002.1 by applying debtor’s post-petition monthly mortgage payments pursuant to the contractual terms of the loan, thereby applying post-petition payments to the debtor’s pre-petition mortgage arrearage. (Cary) In re Pope, 647 B.R. 597 (Bankr. D. N.H. August 15, 2022) Case Summary In November of...
What Happens in the Plan Stays in the Plan – Part I
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By Mark C. Leffler1
click here for part II
“Gambling with a Chapter 13 discharge is a risky proposition” - the ominous opening line of a recent Colorado Bankruptcy Court decision that ended in dismissal due to a material default in plan payments. In re Formaneck, --- B.R. ---, 2015 WL 4241154 at *1 (Bankr. D.Colo. 2015). So, what's the big deal? What makes Formaneck noteworthy? Why write an . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Critical Case Comment – Pre to Pre and Post to Post
ABI Commission on Consumer Bankruptcy – Definition of “Tax Return” for Purposes of Nondischargeability
Safeguarding the Promise of a Fresh Start: Utilizing RESPA to Challenge Mortgage Servicing Errors Post-Discharge
Critical Case Comment – No POC, No Money
Taggart v. Lorenzen: Supreme Court Stakes Out Middle Ground on Contempt Standard for Discharge Injunction Violations, Leaves Clues About Automatic Stay Violations
Obtaining Credit in Chapter 13 – Did the Amendment to FRBP 4001(c) Eliminate Motions to Incur Additional Credit?
The Cloud Cometh
Some Basics You Always Wanted to Know About the FCRA But Were Too Embarrassed to Ask
Critical Case Comment–Be Careful What You Stipulate
Critical Case Comment