July 7 - Members and Subscribers - Welcome to the new and improved abi.org! - If you have not already done so, please reset your ABI password to access the site. Click "Login" and then "Forgot Password"
On Dec. 1, 2015, the new bankruptcy forms went into effect. For creditors’ attorneys, the most notable of these forms is the proof-of-claim form. For debtors’ attorneys, the documents filed to commence the bankruptcy case are the ones that have most drastically changed.
In recent times, proofs of claim, especially those filed by consumer lenders and debt purchasers, have come under increased scrutiny. Rule 3001 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (FRBP) has been amended twice since 2010 to define more specifically what information is required to be included with claims.
In a no-asset chapter 7 case, an unlisted debt is generally discharged. However, the outcome is much less favorable to debtors in asset cases where a known creditor is omitted from the schedules.[1] This leaves debtors with potentially staggering debts after receiving a discharge and surrendering assets to the trustee simply because they did not list a particular creditor, regardless of the reason for their failure to do so.
It is not uncommon for debtors in a chapter 7 case to express their intent to surrender collateral in their statement of intention. In chapter 13 cases, debtors may propose in their plan that they will surrender collateral. In either case, there are instances when a debtor actively defends a state foreclosure action after either receiving a discharge or surrendering the property. This article will address the question of whether such debtor has the right to take action to oppose the foreclosure of the collateral it has purportedly surrendered.
In the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, many homeowners found themselves in dire straits with respect to their residential mortgage loans, and some sought protection in bankruptcy. Even with the ability to cure mortgage payment defaults within a reasonable time,[1] some debtors still lacked the financial ability to maintain their non-modifiable mortgage payments[2] while also making the other payments required under the Bankruptcy Code.
It’s almost springtime, and thoughts in the bankruptcy world naturally turn to … tax refunds. To be sure, bankruptcy trustees have been busy for the last six months ensuring that debtors will turn over their pre-petition tax refunds. Debtors’ counsel have been equally busy advising their new clients on how to protect their tax refunds in advance of filing. As the tax filing deadline approaches, now is a good time to review the status of tax refunds in bankruptcy cases.
In July 2014, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) filed suit against Frederick J. Hanna & Associates P.C., a Georgia-based debt-collection firm, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (CFPA).
Perhaps overshadowed by the overhaul of most of the official bankruptcy forms are the amendments to the Federal Rules of both Bankruptcy and Civil Procedure that took effect on Dec. 1, 2015. Specifically, Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1007 and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 1, 4, 16, 26, 30, 31, 33, 34, 37 and 55 were amended. These amendments govern all proceedings commenced on or after Dec.
