More about Dealing with Very Aggressive Creditors in Bankruptcy

Most creditors don’t challenge your write-off of their debts in bankruptcy. But if one does, the system is poised to resolve that challenge relatively quickly.

 

The last blog, and this one, are about what happens when a creditor raises one of the few available arguments to try to prevent its debt from being legally discharged. (This is separate from debts that by their very nature are excluded from being discharged—child support, most student loans, for example.) As emphasized last time:

• Most potentially dischargeable debts DO in fact get discharged. In most consumer bankruptcy cases, no creditor raises any challenges. To avoid any particular debt from being discharged, the creditor has the burden of establishing that the debt arose out of a very specific sort of bad behavior by you, one that is on a list that is in Section 523 of the Bankruptcy Code.
• Your creditors have a very firm deadline—usually about three months from the filing of your bankruptcy case—for formally raise such a challenge, or else lose the ability ever to do so.
• The challenge is raised by filing a “complaint” stating the facts and law under which the debt should not be discharged. This starts an “adversary proceeding,” a lawsuit focused only on this question.

Avoid Losing by Default

After a creditor files a complaint, THE most important thing to realize is that it will automatically win if you and your attorney do not file a formal answer at the court within the stated deadline. So contact your attorney immediately if you receive a complaint. Depending on the circumstances, you may have discussed this in advance and so could be expecting it. But sometimes it will come as a total surprise. Either way, get in touch quickly with your attorney to determine your game plan and begin acting on it.

Most Discharge Challenges Don’t Go to Trial

The adversary proceeding can go through all the steps of a regular lawsuit. After filing the answer, there can be “discovery”—the process of requesting and exchanging any pertinent information and documents, and holding depositions (questioning witnesses under oath, usually focusing on you and your alleged behavior in incurring the debt). And there could be various kinds of motions, pre-trial hearings, and a full trial. But these kinds of adversary proceedings rarely go through all these step and get to trial, because the amount of money at issue usually does not justify the cost involved for either side to pursue it that far.  So after both sides get a clear picture of the facts, there is usually a settlement. Sometimes one side or the other sees that the facts are not looking good and mostly or completely gives in. The debtor may concede that his or her actions fit the legal standards to prevent the debt from being discharged, or the creditor sees that it’s wasting its time and will dismiss the adversary proceeding. Or else the two sides come up with some sensible compromise.

But if there is enough at stake, or else if one or both sides are unreasonable and insist on getting a decision from the judge (these cases do not go to a jury), the dispute does go to trial. These trials usually last a half-day, or a day, or two, very seldom longer. At the end of trial the bankruptcy judge decides whether the debt is discharged or not. Extremely rarely, this decision can be appealed, in fact theoretically all the way up to the United States Supreme Court!

What’s So Quick and Efficient about All This?

Any litigation is very expensive, so you hope to avoid any discharge challenges. But bankruptcy court is a relatively fast and efficient forum for a number of reasons:

1) Because creditors have the opportunity to review your finances beforehand, much of the time they will not bother to raise challenges at all, avoiding the issue altogether, along with avoiding that additional cost to you.

2) If a creditor does raise a challenge, the issues are narrow and so the fight is usually focused on just a few critical facts. Less facts to dispute makes for a less complicated process.

3) Adversary proceedings move along fairly quickly. Compared to most state court and regular federal court litigation which often takes a couple of years, these kinds of adversary proceedings tend to be resolved in a matter of few months

4) Because bankruptcy judges deal with these kinds of challenges all the time, they are extremely familiar with these legal issues. Compared to conventional trial courts where the judges often have to get into unfamiliar territory, and often deal with multiple parties with huge dollar amounts at stake, these adversary proceedings are quite straightforward.

Having a creditor object to the discharge of a debt can significantly complicate a Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy case. But these disputes are usually settled relatively quickly. Help this happen by informing your attorney about any threats made by creditors before your bankruptcy is filed, and then working closely with your attorney if a creditor follows through on its threat by filing a complaint.

 

Dealing with Very Aggressive Creditors Who Say You Can't Discharge Their Debts in Bankruptcy

Bankruptcy court is a relatively efficient place to determine whether or not you must pay a debt which the creditor says can’t be discharged.

 

One of the realities about filing a consumer bankruptcy case is that your case can get much more challenging if you have a very aggressive creditor. Most creditors take your bankruptcy filing in stride as a normal part of their business, figuring that you’re doing it for a sensible reason. But some creditors take it personally and react with more anger than good sense—often because they have some personal connection to you like an ex-spouse or former business partner. Or other more conventional creditors may honestly believe that they have grounds to prevent their debt from being discharged.

This blog, and the next one, are about what happens when there is such a creditor. The topic here is is not about creditors with rights to collateral, where the issues focus on what will happen to the collateral. It’s not about debts which will clearly not be discharged, like recent income taxes or child support obligations or most student loans. Rather this is about debts that would normally be discharged unless the creditor can prove that the debt arose of some bad behavior by you, usually involving some sort of fraud, theft, drunk driving, or such. Not just any bad behavior will do; it has to be one of a specific list that is in Section 523 of the Bankruptcy Code.

Creditors Have to Put Up or Shut Up

Before filing bankruptcy, you may be told by a creditor’s representative or collection agent that a debt can’t be discharged in bankruptcy or that they will fight you if you file bankruptcy. Most of the time they’re bluffing you. But for sure tell your attorney about the threat so that he or she can determine whether it has any merit. If it doesn’t, that will avoid unnecessary worry for you. In the unlikely event the threat does have merit, that will help your attorney prepare for a challenge by the creditor if it comes.

Even if a challenge has legal merit, a creditor may not pursue it for practical reasons, mostly to avoid putting out more money—in filing fees and attorney fees—to try to prove that you can’t discharge the debt, only to risk losing that battle and wasting its money. At least in theory the law has a “presumption” that your debts will be discharged, so the burden is on the creditor to show that a debt should not be.

And you don’t have to sit around wondering for long whether or not any creditor will raise a challenge. Except in very rare circumstances (such as forgetting to list the creditor in the bankruptcy documents), any creditor that has any objections to the discharge of its debt has only 60 days from your hearing with the trustee to formally file an objection or forever lose its opportunity to do so. Since that meeting (also called the “meeting of creditors” or “341 hearing”) usually happens about a month after your case is filed, this means that within about 3 months after filing you will know.

The “Adversary Proceeding”

The creditor may tell your attorney in advance about an intended challenge, usually in an effort to get you to settle the matter by agreeing to pay part or all of the debt. But much of the time the creditor just files a formal complaint at the bankruptcy court. This begins what is in effect a mini-law suit, called an adversary proceeding, focusing only on whether the creditor can prove the facts that the law requires for the debt to be excluded from discharge. This issue is usually NOT on whether you owe the debt in the first place—that’s usually assumed and admitted. Rather the issue would be whether, for example,  you incurred the debt by falsifying a credit application, by never intending to pay it through bounced checks, by coercing a relative to change their will on your behalf... behavior of this sort.

Please come back to the next blog in a couple days for the rest of the story about what happens in these adversary proceedings.

Paying Your Special Creditor After Filing Bankruptcy

If you file bankruptcy, it’s okay to voluntarily repay any debt. But there can be unexpected consequences.

The Bankruptcy Code says “[n]othing...  prevents a debtor from voluntarily repaying any debt.” Section 524(f).

But that doesn’t mean that repaying a debt won’t have consequences, including sometimes some highly unexpected ones. So what are those consequences?

To start off let’s be clear that we’re NOT talking about a creditor which you want to pay because it has a right to repossess collateral that you want to keep. Nor is this about paying a debt because the law does not let you to discharge (write off) it. Those two categories of debts—secured debts and non-dischargeable ones—have their own sets of rules governing them. We’re talking here about voluntary repayment, paying a debt even though you’re not legally required to.

And let’s also make a big distinction about the timing of those voluntary payments. We’re NOT talking here about payments made to creditors BEFORE the filing of bankruptcy. That was covered in the last blog. Be sure to check that out because the consequences of paying certain creditors at certain times before bankruptcy can be very surprising and frustrating, seemly going against common sense.

Instead, today’s blog is about paying creditors AFTER filing your bankruptcy case. The straightforward rule here is that you can pay your special creditor after filing a “straight” Chapter 7 case, but can’t do so in a “payment plan’ Chapter 13 case. For that you must wait until the case is completed, which is usually three to five years after it starts. So, if you would absolutely want to start making payments to a special creditor—such as a relative who lent you money on a personal loan—right after filing your bankruptcy case, you would have to file a Chapter 7 case instead of a Chapter 13 one.

Why is there such a difference between Chapter 7 and 13 for this? Basically because Chapter 7 fixates for most purposes on your financial life as of the day your case is filed, while Chapter 13 cares about your financial life throughout the length of the payment plan. You can play favorites with one of your creditors right after your Chapter 7 is filed because doing so doesn’t affect your other creditors. In contrast, in a Chapter 13 case your payment plan is designed so that you are paying all you can afford in monthly payments to the trustee to distribute to the creditors in a legally appropriate fashion. Here the law does not allow you to favor one creditor over the other ones just because you have a special personal or moral reason to do so. You can only favor a creditor AFTER the case is completed, again usually three to five years after filing.

So what would the consequences be of paying your special creditor “on the side” during an ongoing Chapter 13 case? The simple answer is that it’s illegal so don’t do it. Beyond that it’s difficult to answer because it would depend on the circumstances of the case (such as how much you paid inappropriately) and would depend on the discretion of the Chapter 13 trustee and of the bankruptcy judge. You’d be risking having your entire Chapter 13 case be thrown out. You would be wasting a tremendous investment of time and money, risking years of your financial life. Clearly, things you want to avoid.

Instead, talk very candidly with your attorney about your special debt and why you are so committed to paying it. There are usually sensible ways for dealing with these kinds of situations once it’s all out on the table. Your attorney’s job is to present options to you for meeting your goals, including that of paying this special creditor. He or she will only be able to do that for you if you make clear that you want to pay off this creditor and explain why.

Are Creditors Going to Challenge the Discharge of Debts in My Bankruptcy Case?

Every creditor has the right to challenge your ability to write off your debts in bankruptcy. But none of them likely will. Why not?

 

For most people filing bankruptcy, every debt they intend to discharge (write off) will in fact be discharged.

There are two categories of debts that are not discharged in bankruptcy. The first category includes those special ones that Congress has decided for policy reasons simply should not be subject to a bankruptcy discharge. Among the most common ones are spousal and child support, most student loans, and many tax obligations. Assuming you are represented by a competent bankruptcy attorney, you will know before your case is filed if any of your debts fall into this category.

The second category of debts includes those that are discharged UNLESS the creditor files a formal objection to the discharge. Any creditor can raise an objection. But creditors very seldom do, for these reasons:

1. Although any creditor can challenge your discharge of its debt, it can only win such a challenge if it can prove that you acted inappropriately in certain very specific ways.  In essence, the creditor has to show that you cheated it in how you incurred the debt. I won’t go into the details here of exactly what kind of dishonest behavior qualifies, but just be aware it simply does not apply to most people and their debts.  So a creditor would just be wasting its time to raise a challenge when it had no legal grounds for doing so.

2. It would not just be wasting its time, but also a fair amount of money. The creditor’s objection has to be in the form of a lawsuit filed in bankruptcy court, which means paying a filing fee and at least hundreds of dollars for its attorney fees. Most creditors are sensible enough to not throw the proverbial good money after bad chasing a hopeless cause.

3. On top of that, bankruptcy law discourages creditors from raising challenges in two ways:

a. Debts are presumed to be dischargeable—at least if they do not fit any of the special nondischargeable debts in the first category referred to above. So the creditor has the burden of proving that the debt is not dischargeable, and the debt is discharged if it fails to provide the necessary evidence to meet that burden.

b. The creditor risks being ordered to pay YOUR costs and attorney fees for defending a challenge if you defeat the challenge. This is an added disincentive for a creditor to push a challenge when it has weak facts against you.

So no matter what a bill collector told you to try to get you not to file bankruptcy, creditors will usually not raise challenges because they usually don’t have legal grounds to do so. And even when a creditor believes it has some facts in its favor, the creditor takes significant financial risks in pushing the challenge.

However, creditors sometimes DO genuinely think your behavior in incurring the debt gives them grounds for filing a challenge to the discharge of its debt. Also the law can favor them when it comes to certain actions by you such as incurring credit card debt or cash advances in the months before filing bankruptcy, writing bad checks even inadvertently, and similar actions which might not seem very egregious.

Also, you may have a creditor who is motivated less by economic good sense than by a desire to cause you trouble, say an ex-spouse or former business partner.

The best way to deal with these situations is, first, to be completely honest with your attorney in answering every question he or she asks you, whether during a meeting or when providing information in writing. Be thorough in your responses. And second, if you have ANY concerns along these lines, make a point of voicing your concerns, and do so early in the process. Never hide the ball from your attorney. Particularly, if you wonder whether you’ve acted inappropriately with any of your creditors, or if you have any personal creditors who are carrying a grudge, discuss it with your attorney. Not only will you be much better protected from rude surprises. Often you’ll feel the relief of learning that you have much less to worry about than you had feared.

How Come My Attorney Cannot Always Tell me Which of My Debts Will be Discharged under Chapter 7?

Most of the time your attorney will know which debts will be legally written off in your bankruptcy. But not always, for two reasons.

 

A couple of blogs ago I made the point that the discharge order entered on your behalf by the bankruptcy judge will write off all of your debts, EXCEPT for those types of debts which are on a list in Section 523 of the Bankruptcy Code. The most common ones on the list include:

a. most but not all taxes

b. debts incurred through fraud or misrepresentation, including recent cash advances and “luxury” purchases

c. debts which were not listed on the bankruptcy schedules on time

d. money owed because of embezzlement, larceny, or through other kinds of theft or fraud in a fiduciary relationship

e. child and spousal support

f. claims against you for intentional injury to another person or property

g. most but not all student loans

h. claims against you for causing injury or death to someone by driving while intoxicated (also applies to boating and flying)

These different types of debts each deserve a closer look, which I will do in upcoming blogs. But let’s go back to the question in today’s title. Most of the time your attorney can reliably tell you whether a particular debt will be discharged in your bankruptcy case. But sometimes he or she will not know because:

1. With some types of debts—the ones described in items b, d, and f of the list above—the debt is discharged unless that creditor raises an objection by a specific deadline (which is usually 60 days after your meeting with the trustee). If you are candid with your attorney about the facts at the beginning of your case, he or she can tell you if there is a risk that a particular creditor will object to the discharge of its debt. Your attorney may even be able to tell you roughly how much of a risk you have, depending on the facts, and sometimes on the reputation of that creditor to object under similar facts. But whether the risk is high or low, with these types of debts neither your attorney nor you will know for sure whether that debt will be discharged until either the creditor objects or the deadline for objection passes without objection.

2. With the other types of debts—the ones described in items a, c, e, g, and h of the list above—at the beginning of the case sometimes either the facts are not sufficiently clear or how the law should be applied to the facts is not clear, or both. You might think that the attorney should get all the necessary facts before filing the case. But sometimes the facts are simply not available, the additional work to get them is not worth the cost, or there is no time to do so because of the need to file the case quickly. Add in the consideration that the bankruptcy statutes often use broad language that can be and is in fact interpreted differently by different judges. As a result, in these situations there is simply no absolute way to know at the start of the case whether a particular debt will be discharged.

Take as an example one of the types of debt listed—a claim against you for causing personal injury to someone by driving while intoxicated. You might think that sounds relatively clear. But not necessarily. What if the accident occurred in a rural area so that the police did not arrive on the scene until well after accident, making unclear whether you were “intoxicated”? What if there wasn’t enough evidence for a criminal conviction but possibly enough for a civil verdict against you? What if the injured driver was also arguably intoxicated? Under these kinds of circumstances, the pertinent facts may not be known until a possible future trial. And even if the facts were clear, the law may not be settled about how to apply those facts to come to a decision. So you can see that in these “gray areas” your attorney may well not be able to tell you in advance whether that particular debt will be discharged.

I need to finish by emphasizing again that most situations are not gray but are black and white, or at least close to it. So usually your attorney CAN tell you with a high degree of confidence whether any particular debts will or will not be discharged. Indeed, in a large percentage of Chapter 7 cases all debts that you want will be discharged. And if you have debts that won’t be discharged—such as support obligations or recent income taxes—that will be quite clear. The point of this blog has been to explain why there are some situations when it is not so clear, when your attorney must make a judgment call based on the likelihood of an objection by a creditor, or based on imprecise facts and/or law.

 

Here's What You Need to Know about the Discharge of Your Debts under Chapter 7

The point of filing bankruptcy is to get relief from your debts. So, when and how DO those debts get “discharged”—legally written off—in a regular Chapter 7 bankruptcy?

 

Here’s what you need to know:

1.      You WILL receive a discharge of your debts, as long as you play by the rules. Under Section 727 of the Bankruptcy Code, the bankruptcy court “shall grant the debtor a discharge” except in relatively unusual circumstances:

• If you’re not an individual!  Corporations and other kinds of business entities do not receive a discharge of debts, only human beings do.
• If you’ve received a discharge in an earlier case too recently. You can’t get a new discharge of your debts in a Chapter 7 case if:
  
  • you already received a discharge of debts in an earlier Chapter 7 case filed no more than 8 years before your present case was filed, or
  • you already received a discharge of debts in an earlier Chapter 13 case filed no more than 6 years before your present case was filed (except under limited conditions).
• If you hide or destroy assets, conceal or destroy records about your financial condition.
• If in connection with your Chapter 7 case you make a false oath, a false claim, or withhold information or records about your property or financial affairs.

2.      ALL your debts will be discharged, UNLESS a particular debt fits one of the specific exceptions. Section 523 of the Code lists those “exceptions to discharge.” I’m not going to discuss those exceptions in detail here, but the main ones include:

• most but not all taxes
• debts incurred through fraud or misrepresentation, including recent cash advances and “luxury” purchases
• debts which were not listed on the bankruptcy schedules on time
• money owed because of embezzlement, larceny, or through other kinds of theft or fraud in a fiduciary relationship
• child and spousal support
• claims against you for intentional injury to another person or property
• most but not all student loans
• claims against you for causing injury or death to someone by driving while intoxicated (also applies to boating and flying)                                                                                                                   

3.      A discharge from the bankruptcy court stops a creditor from ever attempting to collect on the debt. Under Section 524, the discharge order acts as a court injunction against the creditor from taking any action—through a court procedure or on its own--to “collect, recover, or offset any such debt.” If a creditor violates this injunction by trying to pursue a discharged debt, the bankruptcy court may hold the creditor in contempt of court and, depending on the seriousness of its illegal behavior, can require the creditor to pay sanctions.

Irony by Perjury Adds Insult to Injury: from Lender Robo-signing to Foreclosed Homeowners Begging for Scraps from the National Mortgage Fraud Settlement

Homeowners who lost their homes to foreclosure may need to commit perjury to get restitution payments though the settlement.  That would be the deepest kind of insult on injury.

In the last blog, I explained what a homeowner who lost a home to foreclosure (from 2008 through 2011) will have to assert to get his or her small share of that $1.5 billion pot of money:

1. “Borrower lost the home to foreclosure while attempting to save the home through a loan modification or other loss mitigation effort.”

2. “Servicer errors or misconduct in the loss mitigation or foreclosure processes affected the borrower’s ability to save the home.”

While these may seem superficially sensible, in practice they are very troublesome, especially because the statements must be made under penalty of perjury.

As to the first statement, what “other loss mitigation effort” “to save the home” will be considered sufficient to be able to make that statement? Must that effort have continued right up to the foreclosure date to be considered to have “lost the home to foreclosure while attempting to save the home”?  How is the former homeowner to know whether he or she can make this statement truthfully?

The second statement is even more of a problem. How can the former homeowner know whether “servicer errors or misconduct in the loss mitigation or foreclosure processes affected the borrower’s ability to save the home”? The robo-signing of foreclosure documents—mortgage servicers’ false assertions made under oath by the thousands—were only discovered through borrowers’ attorneys’  aggressive discovery efforts during litigation. In this nationwide settlement, the five banks are not admitting ANY wrongdoing or liability. (For example, see the non-admission clause in the Federal Release, Exhibit F in the Wells Fargo settlement documents, paragraph F on page F-11, which is page 232 of the 315 pages of those documents.) Presumably the banks are not now going to start admitting wrongdoing on a case-by-case basis so that borrowers can answer this statement accurately.

So to receive the restitution payment a former homeowner will have to sign a statement under penalty of perjury affirming the truthfulness of one statement that is so vague as to be in many situations meaningless, and the truthfulness of a second statement the accuracy of which is unknowable.

There may yet be a partial solution, to at least the first required statement about the extent of borrowers’ efforts to save the home. The claim form to be sent out to the borrowers’ by the yet-undesignated Settlement Administrator may give enough guidance about this. A tentative 3-page claim form has been prepared by the Monitoring Committee for possible use by the Settlement Administrator. It may create a bright line between qualifying and non-qualifying borrower efforts. We don’t know yet because although this tentative claim form is being made available for companies applying to become the Settlement Administrator (the application deadline is April 30, 2012), it is not being released to anyone else.

But even so, I see no conceivable way that the second statement about “servicer error or misconduct” can be made known to the borrowers in order for them to be able to assert that under penalty of perjury. The banks are not going to admit to wrongdoing as to two million or so homeowners in direct contradiction of their non-liability assertion in the settlement documents.

So here’s the moral irony:

1. The banks were accused by the federal government and 49 states of a long list of allegations of serious wrongdoing which take 10 pages to detail (see pages F-2 through F-11 of the Federal Release in the settlement documents referred to above). These allegations include fraud and misrepresentations of numerous kinds, including in the form of many thousands of perjured documents submitted to courts over an extended period of time. The banks do not admit to any of these allegations or to any resulting liability.

2. Now the banks have negotiated with the governmental entities to pay restitution for their extensive alleged wrongdoing, and in particular to homeowners who’ve already lost their homes to foreclosure. But as a precondition to receiving that restitution, these former homeowners will in many cases be faced with a moral dilemma: can they sign a statement under penalty of perjury asserting that their “ability to save the home” was affected by “servicer errors or misconduct” when they do not know whether such errors or misconduct happened as to their mortgage, and if so whether it had any effect on their “ability to save the home.”

3. Because the “Monitoring Committee” has made clear that the “Settlement Administrator” will not be required to get documentation from borrowers about their statements on the claim forms, borrowers are seemingly being encouraged to make statements that will in many cases be vague and factually unverifiable, while asserting the truthfulness and accuracy of those statements under penalty of perjury.

4. The banks, having admitted to no fault, having paid their modest penalty, and having foisted this moral conundrum onto the foreclosed borrowers, can now wash their hands entirely of the matter. They no longer care how each borrower handles the matter since the pot of money does not change. The money just shifts out of the hands of the perhaps more carefully honest borrowers who disqualify themselves by admitting that they cannot swear to the fact that they lost the property because of lender wrongdoing.

5. Thus this settlement process has lowered borrowers—through circumstances almost entirely outside their control—to the moral level of the original robo-signers: “just sign here and don’t worry what the statements say or what they mean.”

Update on the Cash Distribution to Foreclosed Homeowners from the National Mortgage Fraud Settlement

What qualifies you to receive the $1,500 to $2,000 restitution payment for losing your home to foreclosure? More clues have just become available.

 The “largest consumer financial protection settlement in US history,” the $26 billion national mortgage fraud settlement, was announced with great fanfare in February. More than a month later, on March 12, 2012, the details of the settlement were finalized and hundreds of pages of settlement documents were signed and finally made public. But all those pages still did not at all make clear how a person whose home was foreclosed will qualify to get the money.

To remind you about this, most of the money in this settlement is earmarked for current homeowners for loan modifications, refinances, and other ways to help them hold on to their homes. But just shy of $1.5 billion is for those who’ve already had their homes foreclosed. That’s the subject of this blog.

This part of the settlement applies only to:

• foreclosures that occurred during the calendar years 2008 through 2011
• mortgages held or serviced by Bank of America, Wells Fargo, J.P. Morgan Chase, Ally Financial/GMAC and CitiGroup and their affiliates
• mortgages on which at least 3 payments were made and the property “was not abandoned by the homeowner or condemned prior to the time of the foreclosure sale” 
• “owner-occupied, one-to-four unit” residence in all states except for Oklahoma, which is not participating in this settlement

Find out if your mortgage is included in this settlement pool by going to the special settlement website for the banks’ toll-free phone numbers and websites.

But once you are in this pool, what further conditions, must you meet to get the money? The initial settlement documents last month surprisingly did not make this clear. They just stated that “cash payments” from the $1.5 billion fund would be provided to borrowers whose homes were foreclosed during the 2008 through 2011 period and “who submit claims arising from the Covered Conduct [the alleged mortgage servicing and foreclosure fraud]; and who otherwise meet criteria set forth by the State members of the Monitoring Committee.”

So if you are a foreclosed homeowner, do you only get the settlement money if you can show your foreclosure happened because of your bank’s alleged misconduct? Has the “Monitoring Committee” provided any more information on this or any other criteria to be used?

Two and a half months after the February 9 announcement of the settlement, there is still no definite answer to the first question. And the second question? The 14 state attorneys general on the “Monitoring Committee” has curiously not directly told foreclosed homeowners anything more about the qualifying criteria, apparently because that will be the job of the “Settlement Administrator.” But in the last few days this Committee HAS indirectly provided some important clues about the criteria through its release of two documents:

• The Request for Proposals (RFP) to those wanting to become the Settlement Administrator
• The First Addendum to that RFP, answering 16 follow-up questions about the RFP.

The RFP states the following:

Borrower Certifications:

In addition to the baseline eligibility criteria listed above, eligible claimants must also complete a claim certification form in which they certify under penalty of perjury to the following:

• Borrower lost the home to foreclosure while attempting to save the home through a loan modification or other loss mitigation effort.
  

• Servicer errors or misconduct in the loss mitigation or foreclosure processes affected the borrower's ability to save the home.

But those two requirements are not clear either. What would be considered an adequate attempt by the borrower to save the home? For example, if you simply made a number of unsuccessful attempts to get the lender to respond to phone messages—would that be enough? And how are you going to know when a bank’s misconduct “affected” your ability to save the home when the bank is providing you that kind of information and not admitting anything? Indeed, in this entire multi-billion dollar settlement the banks are not admitting to a single act of misconduct!

The First Addendum—released just a few days ago on April 20—gives some further clues, albeit maddening ones. Here is a pertinent question from the Addendum and the Monitoring Committee’s response:

Question #12: Will the Settlement Administrator be required to request and review documentary proof from claimants who submit claim certification forms in order to determine eligibility?

Answer: No. Other than reviewing the claim certification forms to ensure that claimants properly made the required certifications, the Settlement Administrator will not be required to request and review documentary proof from claimants in order to determine eligibility.

So to receive the settlement money, it looks like you as a foreclosed homeowner will have to sign a claim form stating under penalty of perjury that the foreclosure occurred in spite of you efforts to save the home, AND the foreclosure occurred because of the bank’s “errors or misconduct”—which you may well have no way of knowing about. But, it looks like you will not need to provide any documentation to verify your statements. It is unclear whether information will be provided by your bank to the Settlement Administrator which might contradict your statements—for example asserting that you did not attempt to contact the bank to try to save the home. And if that occurs, there’s also no indication how such disputed facts would be resolved.

Stay tuned here, and on the settlement website, for answers to these continuing ambiguities.

Dealing with Accusations of Business Fraud through Bankruptcy

When a small business fails, its owner or employer is sometimes accused of causing or hastening that failure through fraud or intentional bad behavior. If that person is already considering filing a bankruptcy to deal with the financial fallout of the closing of the business, how are those accusations going to be handled in that bankruptcy case?

A bankruptcy filed after the failure of a business tends to be more acrimonious than in a straight consumer bankruptcy because:

• The relationship between debtor and creditor is often more personal and intense—such as between business partners, between a key employee and the owner, or between the owner and investors who were friends or a relatives. So the failure is taken more personally, and the person who lost money is more likely to feel a sense of betrayal.

• The business context often provides many all-too-convenient opportunities for the debtor to bend the rules or behave underhandedly, especially “when desperate times call for desperate measures.” On the other hand, actions that the debtor took in good faith at the time may simply look inappropriate in hindsight.

• There is often more money at stake, money which these kinds of creditors can less afford to lose than a conventional commercial creditor. So it’s harder for these creditors to just write it off and walk away.

So if you have been accused by a former business partner, investor, or similar business creditor of some sort of business fraud, or fear that you will be so accused, does this mean that you should avoid filing bankruptcy? Of course you will want to discuss a serious matter like this very thoroughly with your bankruptcy attorney, perhaps in consultation with your business or litigation attorney if those accusations have already ripened into a lawsuit against you. But, interestingly, there are a set of practical reasons why those kinds of accusations often go away, or at least are reduced in seriousness, when you file a bankruptcy.

1. Automatic stay

The filing of your bankruptcy case stops, at least temporarily, any litigation against you already in process, and prevents a lawsuit from being filed or any other collection action to be taken against you. This pause in the action at least gives your adversary the opportunity to consider whether continuing to pursue you would truly be worthwhile.

2. More difficult to make a case against you

That pause is valuable because your bankruptcy filing changes the rules of the game, mostly in your favor. When you file your bankruptcy, you make it harder for your creditor to win against you. It’s no longer enough to merely establish that you owe him or her some money. Once you file bankruptcy, for the debt not to be discharged the creditor must also establish that the debt is based on one of a relatively narrow set of facts involving fraud, misrepresentation, embezzlement or theft, fraud in a fiduciary capacity, or an intentional and malicious injury to person or property.

3. Proof of your true finances

The documents you are required to file under oath in your bankruptcy case should show your angry creditor, and maybe more importantly his attorney, that even if the case against you was successful, you have no pot of gold with which to pay a judgment. Most sensible people do not like “spending good money after bad”—paying thousands of dollars to their attorney only to get a judgment that could never be collected, or only so slowly that the additional expense would simply not be worth all the risk and effort.

So, notwithstanding the tendency for small business-spawned bankruptcies to be more contentious, filing such a bankruptcy can create decisive advantages for you if you are being pursued for an alleged business fraud—you decrease your opponent’s odds of winning and increase his costs of pursuing you.

 

The National Mortgage Settlement's Actual Terms Finally Released

The settlement documents of the deal that was announced more than a month ago were finally completed and filed at court on Monday, March 12. They catalog page after page of serious wrongdoing by the banks in their servicing of mortgages and processing of foreclosures.

In my last blog I said that the settlement would be finalized and made public “any day now.” It actually happened only hours later.

The settlement documents consist of hundreds of pages, but I’ll make it easy for you.

One document talks about the past, the wrongdoing by the banks. That’s the Complaint. The plaintiffs are the United States, 49 of the 50 states (all except Oklahoma), and the District of Columbia; the defendants are five of the biggest banks—Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi, and Ally/GMAC, and their subsidiaries, totaling 18 named defendants. This 99-page Complaint is the subject of today’s blog.

The rest of the documents—one Consent Judgment for each of the five banks—talk about the agreed penalties for the banks’ past wrongdoing, but mostly focus on the future: 1) where the money from those penalties is going to be spent; and 2) the new standards by which these banks are now required to service mortgages and process foreclosures.  In my next blog I’ll talk about these penalties, and how they are supposed to help homeowners who have been hurt by the banks.

To say that the Complaint is 99 pages long is misleading, because it actually ends on page 48, followed by signature pages for each of the 51 plaintiffs. And In fact the document doesn’t really get to the point until the Factual Allegation starting on page 21. The detailed litany of bank misconduct goes on relentlessly for the following 16 pages, totaling 55 paragraphs of allegations, some including many subparagraphs of even more detailed allegations. It’s difficult to do justice to all this in one blog. To try to show both the breadth and depth of the alleged misconduct, I’ll give you most of the Complaint’s outline of the types of wrongdoing, and one or two examples quoted under each one:

A. The Banks’ Servicing Misconduct

            1. The Banks’ Unfair, Deceptive, and Unlawful Servicing Processes

Failing to timely and accurately apply payments made by borrowers and failing to maintain accurate account statements; imposing force-placed insurance without properly notifying the borrowers and when borrowers already had adequate coverage.

             2. The Banks’ Unfair, Deceptive, and Unlawful Loan Modification and Loss       Mitigation Processes

Providing false or misleading information to consumers while initiating foreclosures where the borrower was in good faith actively pursuing a loss mitigation alternative offered by the Bank; miscalculating borrowers’ eligibility for loan modification programs and improperly denying loan modification relief to eligible borrowers.

   3. Wrongful Conduct Related to Foreclosures

Preparing, executing, notarizing or presenting false and misleading documents, filing false and misleading documents with courts and government agencies, or otherwise using false or misleading documents as part of the foreclosure process (including, but not limited to affidavits, declarations, certifications, substitutions of trustees, and assignments).

 B. The Banks’ Origination Misconduct

   1. Unfair and Deceptive Origination Practices

In the course of their origination of mortgage loans in the Plaintiff States, the Banks have engaged in a pattern of unfair and deceptive practices. Among other consequences, these practices caused borrowers in the Plaintiff States to enter into unaffordable mortgage loans that led to increased foreclosures in the States.

 C. The Banks’ Bankruptcy-Related Misconduct

Making representations that were inaccurate, misleading, false, or for which the Banks, at the time, did not have a reasonable basis to make, including without limitation representations contained in proofs of claim under 11 U.S.C. § 501, motions for relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362, or other documents.

 D. Violation of Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA)

The Banks foreclosed upon mortgages without required court orders on properties that were owned by service members who, at the time, were on military service or were otherwise protected by the SCRA.

 The 55 paragraphs of wrongdoing resulted in these five banks agreeing to pay about $26 billion in a combination of cash and other forms, to the states and to individual homeowners. As I said, I’ll tell you how this is supposed to be divvied up in my next blog.  

Business Disputes that Get Dragged Into Your Bankruptcy Case

Creditors can challenge your ability to legally discharge your debts in a bankruptcy case. These challenges happen more so in bankruptcy cases filed to clean up after the close of a business. Avoid the creditor challenges for a cleaner case.

Bankruptcies filed after the close of a business seem to attract more creditor challenges to the discharge of debts for a number of reasons:

1. The amounts at issue tend to be larger, making litigation more tempting for the creditor.

2. Certain debtor-creditor relationships can become deeply personal, and so when things go badly, can turn very antagonistic. So in debts between ex-business-partners, or between a business owner and his or her financial supporter or investor, or the buyer and the seller of a business, the aggrieved creditor is more reluctant to let the debt be discharged without a fight.

3. For business owners trying to keep their businesses afloat, desperate times call for desperate measures, so they edge into risky behavior that exposes them to future challenge in bankruptcy court.

4. In these kinds of close creditor-debtor relationships, the creditor often knows something about the debtor’s risky behavior, making it more likely to be raised later in court.

On the other hand, when former business owners considering bankruptcy hear that any creditor can raise challenges to the discharge of its debt, they often feel that will inevitably happen in their case. But such challenges are in fact relatively rare, for the following legal and practical reasons:

1. The legal grounds under which challenges to discharge can be raised are relatively narrow. Instead of just proving the existence of a valid debt—as in a conventional lawsuit to collect on a debt—the creditor has to prove that the debtor engaged in behavior such as fraud in incurring the debt, embezzlement, larceny, fraud as a fiduciary, or intentional and malicious injury to property.

2. In bankruptcy, the debtor files under oath a set of extensive documents about his or her finances, and is also subject to questioning by the creditors about those documents and about anything else relevant to the discharge of the debts. When these documents, along with any questioning, reveal that the debtor genuinely has nothing worth chasing—as is most often the case—this tends to cool the anger of most creditors. Only the most motivated of creditors will be willing to throw the proverbial good money after bad in the hopes of getting nothing more than a questionably collectible judgment.  

So in a closed-business bankruptcy case we have these two opposing tendencies—more likely to have challenges to the discharge of significant debts, especially by certain kinds of closely related creditors, but these challenges are still relatively rare because of the narrow legal grounds for them and the financial practicalities involved. It is impossible to predict perfectly something that is largely outside of the control of the debtor. But a good bankruptcy attorney will give you good counsel about this, prepare your paperwork in the best possible way to counter any such challenges, and may even be able to defuse them before they are raised. A dischargeability challenge is very expensive to defend and can turn a relatively simple bankruptcy case into a very involved one. So avoiding one if possible, or positioning well for it if it is raised, are important reasons to have an experienced and conscientious bankruptcy attorney in your corner. That’s all the more true if you have reason to believe that any of your business creditors are in fact considering raising such a challenge.

Will You Benefit from the Just-Completed $26 Billion Home Mortgage and Foreclosure Settlement?

The long-awaited joint federal-state settlement with the major banks for their alleged fraudulent documentation and processing of mortgages and foreclosures was announced on Thursday, February 9. Will it help you, and if so, how?

I interrupt my ongoing series on small business bankruptcy to answer your most immediate questions about this huge settlement.

1. Who is included in this settlement?

• Only five big banks are currently signed on: Bank of America, Wells Fargo, J.P. Morgan Chase, Ally Financial and Citigroup.  Only mortgages owned and held by them are directly affected.  Negotiations continue with nine other mortgage servicers, which if successful could bring the total amount of money involved to $30 billion.
• 49 states joined in the settlement; only Oklahoma did not.
• Mortgages held by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—consisting of the majority of U.S. mortgages—are NOT covered.

2. What does this settlement resolve and what is open for further negotiation and litigation? In other words, what liabilities are the banks escaping from for their $26 billion?

• The claims against the banks that are released in this settlement are limited to mortgage servicing and foreclosure claims. Claims for a variety of other alleged wrongdoing are not covered and so remain open to being pursued by the federal and state regulators, investors, and homeowners. Claims that are NOT covered include those related to the securitization of mortgage-backed securities that were at the heart of the financial crisis, and those against or involving MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems).
• Individuals’ rights to bring their own lawsuits or to be part of a class action against any banks for any claims are not affected by this settlement.
• The settlement does not limit any potential criminal liability for any individuals or financial institutions; it provides no immunity from prosecution whatsoever.

3. How does the settlement help you if your mortgage is held by one of these five banks?

• If you need a mortgage loan modification, these servicers will (finally!) be required to offer principal reductions, for first and second mortgages, to a value of up to $17 billion. This is where the bulk of the settlement funds are earmarked.
• If you’re current on your mortgage but your home is worth less than the mortgage, $3 billion of the settlement is to provide refinancing relief.
• If your home has already been foreclosed, $1.5 billion will be paid out by the banks as a penalty against them--around  $2,000 per homeowner--without you needing to show any damages or releasing any claims against the bank.

4. Where do you go for more information and to find out whether you will be helped in any of these ways?

• Go to the new settlement website for current and upcoming information about it:

http://www.nationalmortgagesettlement.com

Keeping It Simple in a Closed-Business Chapter 7 Case

Using a Chapter 7 case to clean up after closing down your business will be easy or not depending largely on three factors: business assets, taxes, and other nondischargeable debts. These three will usually also determine if you should be in a Chapter 7 case or instead in a Chapter 13 one.

Once you’ve closed down your business and decided to file bankruptcy, you may have a strong gut feeling about choosing the Chapter 7 option. After what you’ve been through, you just want a fresh, clean start. If you’d put years of blood, sweat and tears into trying to get your business to succeed, and then finally had to throw in the towel after resisting doing so for so long, at this point you likely feel like it’s time to put all that behind you. The last thing you likely feel like doing is dragging things along for the next three to five years that a Chapter 13 case usually lasts.

And you may well be ABLE to file a Chapter 7 case. The “means test” largely determines whether, given your income and expenses, you can file a Chapter 7 case. In my last blog I told you that you can avoid the “means test” altogether if more than half of your debts are business debts instead of consumer debts. But even if that does not apply to you, the “means test” will still not likely stand in your way, especially if you just closed down your business recently. That’s because the period of income that counts for the “means test” is the six full calendar months before your bankruptcy case is filed. An about-to-fail business usually isn’t generating much income.

But usually the question is not whether you are able to file a Chapter 7 case, but rather whether doing so is really better for you than a Chapter 13 one.

Many factors can come into play, but the following three seem to come up all the time:

1. Business assets: There are two kinds of Chapter 7 cases: “no asset” and “asset.” In the former, the Chapter 7 trustee decides—usually quite quickly—that none of your assets (which technically belong to your “bankruptcy estate”) are worth taking and selling to pay creditors. Either all those assets are “exempt” from the reach of the trustee, or are not worth enough for the trustee to bother. But with a recently closed business, there are more likely to be assets that are not exempt and are worth the trustee’s effort to collect and liquidate. If you have such collectable business assets, you will want to discuss with your attorney where the anticipated proceeds of the Chapter 7 trustee’s sale of those assets would likely go, and whether that is in your best interest compared to what would happen to those assets in a Chapter 13 case.

2. Taxes: Just about every closed-business bankruptcy seems to involve tax debts. Although some taxes CAN be discharged in a Chapter 7 case, most cannot. Chapter 13 is often a better way to deal with taxes. This will depend on the precise kind of tax—personal income tax, employee withholding tax, sales tax—and on a series of other factors such as when the tax became due, whether a tax return was filed, if so when, and whether a tax lien was recorded.

3. Other nondischargeable debts: Bankruptcies involving former businesses seem to get more than the usual amount of creditor challenges to the discharge of debts. These challenges are usually based on allegations that the business owner acted in some fraudulent fashion against a former business partner, a business landlord. or some other major creditor.  Such litigation, often started or at least threatened before the bankruptcy is filed, can turn an otherwise simple bankruptcy case into a long and expensive battle, regardless whether your case is a Chapter 7 or 13. But depending on the nature of the anticipated allegations, Chapter 13 may give you certain legal and tactical advantages over Chapter 7.

I’ll expand on these three one at a time in my next three blogs. From them you will be able to get a much better idea whether your business bankruptcy case should be in a Chapter 7 or not, and if so whether it will likely be relatively simple or not.