Abstract:The federal student loan program is a disaster. Over five million people are in default even though Congress provides all borrowers with the right to affordable payments and to discharge of borrowers’ debts in specific circumstances. Many student loan borrowers … Law Review: Cox, Prentiss and Engel, Kathleen, Student Loan Reform: Rights Under the Law, Incentives Under Contract, and Mission Failure Under ED (October 6, 2020). Harvard Journal on Legislation, Forthcoming, Read More »

Questions about the fairness of the current credit reporting system have recently started to take new prominence with the National Consumer Law Center releasing a report The Credit Score Pandemic Paradox and Credit Invisibility and blog posts on Creditslips.org offering … News: Credit Invisibility and Chapter 13 Read More »

Abstract: In Whitlock v. Lowe (In re Deberry) (5th Cir. 2019), the Fifth Circuit court of appeals found it obvious that if a transferee gives back fraudulently transferred funds (which the debtor then dissipates), the transferee has a complete defense … Law Review: Carlson, David Gray, Giving Back a Fraudulent Transfer: A Defense to Liability? (July 1, 2020). Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 613, 94 Am. Bankr. L.J. (2020) Read More »

Substituting Bankruptcy For Other Options: Is It Viable? What Are The Alternatives To Filing For Chapter 7 Or Chapter 13 Bankruptcy? Bankruptcy is the most effective solution for debt relief available for most people. However, many people want to do whatever they can to avoid calling a bankruptcy attorney. Some try to avoid it because of the stigma associated with bankruptcy, thinking that others will judge them for it or that it somehow indicates a personal failing. Others avoid it because they are worried about how bankruptcy will impact them in the long term, such as by bringing down their credit score or making it difficult to buy a new home. The truth is often the opposite of what people think about bankruptcy. The truth is that bankruptcy is a legal right for those who qualify, and it is one of the best ways for many to get debt relief. Many people have to file bankruptcy because they lost a job, became seriously ill or injured, or were just led astray by credit card companies or predatory lenders – not because they were bad people. Filing for bankruptcy can also help you to restore your credit more quickly, by giving you fast debt relief instead of you continuing to struggle with debt that you can’t pay. Still, if you feel like you want to try out alternatives to bankruptcy before you call a bankruptcy attorney, these are some common options: Creditor Negotiation Many people who are considering bankruptcy are struggling with credit card debt. It’s no surprise – credit cards are easy to get, and they come with sky-high interest rates. It’s those interest rates that make it so hard for you to pay them off. You might try to make your debt more manageable by calling your credit card companies directly and try to negotiate better rates with them. Sometimes, the companies will agree if they think that you aren’t going to be able to pay otherwise. But most will refuse. Your other option for negotiating will be to offer a lump sum to settle your account. Again, many credit card companies are going to refuse. They are going to try to get the full amount owed whenever possible. If you have enough to offer a lump sum, chances are good that the company will think you have enough to pay the full amount, even if not immediately. Work With a Consumer Credit Counseling Agency Sometimes, you may not have any luck negotiating with credit card companies yourself, but you may be more successful if you are working with a credit counseling agency. The companies know that if you are at the point where you want to work with an agency that you are struggling, so they may be more willing to negotiate. Know that this will not always be true. Credit counseling agencies do not always get results, and they can also charge fees. If you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy instead, you can get all your unsecured debt discharged and pay nothing. If you file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, you’ll achieve the same results as the credit counseling agency would try to get for you, but you’ll end up with better terms and you won’t have to pay the agency on top of it. Attempt a Debt Settlement If your debt is very delinquent, your creditors may be willing to agree to a debt settlement in which you pay off your debt over a longer period of time. They may even agree to adjust the terms, such as lowering the overall amount you owe, lowering the monthly payment, or lowering the interest. But, again, it is not that often that companies will agree to this since their goal will be to get all the money they can. If you have secured debts, they also know they can still seize your assets to satisfy the debt. Filing for Chapter 13 bankruptcy is essentially entering into a debt settlement – without asking for your creditors’ permission or doing it on their terms. Instead, the bankruptcy court decides what you can afford to pay and sets the terms. You may even be able to have some debt discharged when the repayment plan is completed. While you may have options for debt relief besides bankruptcy, you will quickly learn that most of them will not work out or that they will not provide you the same debt relief that bankruptcy will. Certainly, look into these options, but also talk to a reputable bankruptcy lawyer. You will likely find that bankruptcy will offer you more comprehensive debt relief and more quickly. Contact Arizona’s Leading Bankruptcy Attorneys Call My AZ Lawyers today to talk with a bankruptcy attorney about how bankruptcy can help you get the debt relief you need. We help clients get debt relief through both Chapter 7 bankruptcy and Chapter 13 bankruptcy. We’ll help you understand which will give you the most benefits based on your financial circumstances. We represent clients in Mesa, Glendale, Tucson, and the Phoenix areas. Contact us today to met with a bankruptcy attorney and learn more.   Arizona Offices: Mesa Location: 1731 West Baseline Rd., Suite #100 Mesa, AZ 85202 Office: (480) 448-9800 Email: info@myazlawyers.com Website: https://myazlawyers.com/ Glendale Location: 20325 N 51st Avenue Suite #134, Building 5 Glendale, AZ 85308 Office: (602) 509-0955 Tucson Location: 2 East Congress St., Suite #900-6A Tucson, AZ 85701 Office: (520) 441-1450 Avondale Location: 12725 W. Indian School Rd., Ste E, #101 Avondale, AZ 85392 Office: (623) 469-6603 The post Substituting Bankruptcy For Other Options: Is It Viable? appeared first on My AZ Lawyers.

Generally speaking, police must have some valid reason to stop a driver on the road.  However, in Pennsylvania, police have the authority to set up DUI Checkpoints (or roadblocks) under Title 75 Section 6308(b) which specifically allows police to stop a vehicle in order to investigate or check the vehicle’s registration, proof of insurance, vehicle […] The post How Do DUI Checkpoints Work in Pennsylvania? appeared first on .

What is FSBO (For Sale By Owner)? FSBO (For Sale By Owner) refers to the process of selling one’s home without the help of a real estate agent or broker. With the rise of house listing websites and new tools to aid FSBO sellers, this cost-effective method has become more accessible to the average homeowner.  Eliminating a real estate agent may increase profit from your house’s sale. However, going the FSBO route means more work for the seller. FSBO sellers must take on the responsibilities of listing a property, marketing it, hosting open houses, and negotiating with interested buyers. Why hire an FSBO Lawyer? Real estate law is complex and ever-changing. Hiring a FSBO lawyer mitigates the risks associated with real estate transactions while saving time and frustration. Yet, the most significant benefit of an FSBO lawyer is that they can prevent potentially expensive complications that could derail or delay a sale. What can an FSBO Lawyer do for sellers? Negotiate purchase and sale agreements with buyers.Draft contracts, purchase agreements, and closing documents in accordance with federal, state, and local laws.Offer counsel in the event of a dispute with a buyer.Tailor legal advice to the seller’s unique situation and help sellers to foresee potential problems.If anything at closing goes awry, such as the buyer backing out or an issue with your title insurance, a lawyer will be on your side to assist and protect your home sale.Without a real estate lawyer, FSBO sellers need to arrange for title insurance, preparing the deed, and scheduling the closing. What does a real estate lawyer do for an FSBO buyer? Buying a home is a significant investment and a milestone in the life of many buyers. Real estate lawyers handle the often-overwhelming amount of paperwork involved in a real estate purchase. FSBO buyers can be confident that when a FSBO lawyer is involved in a deal, the transaction will be free of scams, unfavorable terms, and legal obstacles. Assist FSBO buyers with writing and revising an Offer to Purchase as well as any needed counteroffers.A FSBO lawyer can negotiate on your behalf during the purchase process.Review documents and contracts for red flags and potential problems.Make certain that sellers are following all federal, state, and local laws.Eliminate the risk of potentially costly errors in documents and contracts.Help buyers with construction, zoning, and association questions.Wisconsin real estate lawyers can review the property’s title to ensure that there are no liens or easements. Do I need a lawyer for a Wisconsin FSBO real estate sale?  The State of Wisconsin does not legally require sellers to have a lawyer for their FSBO real estate transaction. However, 21 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have deemed it lawfully necessary for all FSBO sellers to employ a lawyer during the real estate closing process.  Frequently Asked Questions  When should a seller hire a real estate lawyer? Selling a home is complex, and the potential legal pitfalls can be difficult to foresee. For first-time sellers, a FSBO lawyer should be considered an essential part of the selling process from start to finish. Some experienced FSBO sellers wait to bring in a lawyer until a problem arises, such as a dispute with a buyer or uncertainty about a contract’s terms. Getting a lawyer involved early – as soon as you decide to go it alone – gives the seller an edge throughout the process.  How much does a Wisconsin FSBO lawyer cost? The cost of a Wisconsin FSBO lawyer may vary, and the price depends on several factors. To determine the cost of an FSBO lawyer for your situation, call Wynn at Law, LLC at 262-725-0175.  How do I sell my home without a real estate agent?  Selling a home without a real estate agent is a great way to save on costs while maintaining freedom and control throughout the selling process. Successful FSBO sellers typically follow these six steps:  Retain a Wisconsin FSBO lawyer.Research the local housing market and view other properties for sale in the area.Prepare your home for pictures, open houses, tours, and showings.Set the asking price for your house and list the property for sale on Zillow, FSBO.com, and Trulia.Show your home to interested buyers.Negotiate and accept the best offer. What is the difference between a real estate lawyer and a real estate agent? Real estate agents are not attorneys. Real estate agents cannot provide legal advice on contracts or other legal aspects of the transaction process. Agents cannot interpret title work or draft conveyance documents like a deed. Conversely, real estate lawyers can provide legal counsel, draft legal documents, and ensure that the transaction follows local, state, and federal regulations. Generally, a real estate agent is paid a commission based upon the sales price at closing and a real estate attorney is paid a set hourly rate. Do the FSBO buyer and seller both need a real estate lawyer? Hiring a lawyer to protect your rights, money, and real estate transaction is the common sense thing for both FSBO parties. It is highly recommended that both buyers and sellers have a lawyer during FSBO real estate transactions. A real estate lawyer cannot represent both parties in a transaction, as it would be a conflict of interest. A buyer’s lawyer protects the buyer and ensures that the sale meets all legal requirements. The FSBO seller’s lawyer maximizes the seller’s interests and ensures the transaction follows a lawful process for the deed’s transfer.  Wynn at Law, LLC’s Real Estate Closing Checklist For Buyers Wynn at Law, LLC’s Real Estate Closing Checklist For Sellers Contact Wynn at Law, LLC for all FSBO Transactions If you are selling your home FSBO (For Sale By Owner) or buying a home FSBO, you need a knowledgeable real estate lawyer to protect your interests in the transaction.  Wynn at Law, LLC will ensure your FSBO sale is completed lawfully and works diligently to provide the best outcome for our clients. If you plan to buy or sell a home FSBO, contact our real estate lawyers to assist you every step of the way. Our knowledgeable FSBO lawyers are active members of the Wisconsin Realtors Association and will work with you to get the highest return on your house’s sale. Wynn at Law, LLC has law offices located in Salem, Lake Geneva, and Delavan, Wisconsin. Contact us at 262-725-0175 to schedule an appointment today. The post A Wisconsin Lawyer’s Guide to FSBO Real Estate Transactions appeared first on Wynn at Law, LLC.

Summary: On September 23, 2019, Mouzon Bass, the president of Ebenconcepts, Inc., which was the Debtor’s former employer, assigned to the Debtor a whole life insurance policy with a cash value of $814,917.00 in consideration for the Debtor’s shares in … Bankr. E.D.N.C.: Harden v. Harrison- Re-Designation of Beneficiary of Whole Life Insurance was not a Transfer Read More »

    One of the more common areas of litigation in bankruptcy is a request by a creditor to find that the debt owed to them is not discharged by the bankruptcy based on misrepresentation when the debt is made pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2).  A good analysis of the elements required under this section is provided in In re Polasky, 2021 Bankr. LEXIS 362, 2021 WL 614032, Adv. No. 2:18-ap-594-FMD (Bankr. M.D. FL 17 February 2021).   The case involved the sale of a parcel of real estate on which debtor operated a hair salon to an investor for $900,000 with a lease agreement with the buyer which was guaranteed by the debtor for four years.  The sale closed on 30 October 2017.  Six months later the debtor advised that the salon could not meet its obligations as they came due, and was dissolving.  The owners filed for relief under chapter 7 in 2018.  In 2019 the buyer sold the property to a third party for $735,000.   Plaintiff alleged in its §523(a)(2) complaint that debtor schemed with her spouse to induce Plaintiff to purchase the property by representing that the business was profitable  and would be able to meet able to perform it's obligations under the lease.  The allegations included that the salon's owners provided information purporting to show the company's viability and asserted that plaintiff relied on such representations when in fact the business was operating at a loss, requiring substantial loans for the owner's spouse to continue operating.      The Court first noted that under §523(a)(2) a plaintiff must prove all the elements of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence.1  As the complaint did not specify whether it was proceeding under §523(a)(2)(A) or §523(a)(2)(B), the Court examined both provisions.   §523(a)(2)(A) involves debts obtained by false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud other than a statement respecting the debtor's or an insider's financial condition.  §523(a)(2)(B) on the other hand applies to a statement in writing  that i) is materially false, ii) respects the debtor's or an insider's financial condition;  iii) on which the creditor reasonably relied, and iv) that the debtor caused to be made or published with intent to deceive.   The representations relied on by plaintiff were contained in two emails from the Polonski's real estate agent to the buyer's real estate agent.  The first email included a copy of the lease and profit and loss statements from the salon.  The second email involved responses by Polonski's agent to questions regarding the profit and loss statements and the relocation of equipment.   Since the emails on which Plaintiff relies relate to the salon's financial condition, they cannot support a claim under §523(a)(2)(A).  The court then examined the four elements required under §523(a)(2)(B).  First, a plaintiff must not only show the statement is untrue, it must show that the statement paints a substantially untruthful picture of the debtor's or insider's financial condition, and that the statement misrepresented the type of information that would normally affect the decision at issue.2  Plaintiff alleged that the P&L's portrayed the salon as a highly profitable business that was current on the lease when it was actually in default on the lease and hemorrhaging losses.  While the Court found the record supported a finding that the Salon was financially troubled and being propped up by loans from the husband, the only information on the P&Ls showed the cash flow, not total assets and liabilities.  Plaintiff was unable to produce evidence that the profit and loss cash flow statements were inaccurate.  Next, a plaintiff must show reasonable reliance on the financial statement.  This reliance is based on an objective standard, whether an ordinary person would have relied on the statements based on the totality of the circumstances.  Here Plaintiff's purchase of the property as an investment reflected his primary concern whether the salon could perform under the lease in the future.  However a statement about an act to be performed in the future is essentially a promise, and only actionable if the debtor made the statement with no intent of keeping the promise.3  Plaintiff was unable to prove that at the time the P&L's were sent or at the time the new lease was entered Debtor intended to terminate the lease.  Further, there was testimony as to concern by the buyer's real estate agent of a possible default, and acknowledgment that the debtor intended to sell the salon at some time in the future.  Other factors indicating reliance was not reasonable was there there were no prior dealings between the parties, that debtor was both the property owner and the tenant so debtor's self-dealings could be considered a red flag to alert plaintiff of the need to verify the information; the P&L's were prepared by an internal bookkeeper rather than an independent professional, the P&Ls did not reflect outstanding gift certificates, Plaintiff did not request copies of the salon's tax returns, a balance sheet, or other financial statements,  Plaintiff did not request personal financial information from Debtor, and the Plaintiff's manager never spoke directly to the debtor or her spouse, instead communicating only through the real estate agent.  Finally, Plaintiff did not show by a preponderance of the evidence that debtor made the statement as to her financial condition with the intent to deceive the creditor.  Again, court's look to the totality of the circumstances in making this determination.  Courts also try to distinguish between dishonest debtors and careless debtors.  Plaintiff relies on an email from Debtor's husband to their own real estate agent  disclosing 1) the husband's lien is being paid from the sale proceeds, 2) Debtor's claimed lack of knowledge regarding the salon's financial statements, and 3) a promissory note dated as of the closing date payable from the salon to Debtor and her husband.  Plaintiff contends that these show the Debtor knew that the salon was in substantial debt and would not be able to comply with the new lease.  Again, the Court recognized that Debtor knew the salon was in poor health before the sale, but Plaintiff was a sophisticated real estate investor did not prove Debtor falsely represented the salon's profitability knowing or intending that the salon would default on the lease.  The email relied on was not written by Debtor, was not addressed to Plaintiff's agent, and makes no reference to a plan to close the salon.   Thus the Court found the debt was discharged by the bankruptcy due to the failure of Plaintiff to show the elements of the statute by a preponderance of the evidence.1 Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 287-288, 111 S. Ct. 654, 660, 112 L. Ed. 2d 755 (1991).↩2 In re Anzo, 547 B.R. 454, 465-66 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2016).↩3 In re Moore, 620 B.R. 617, 629 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2020).↩Michael BarnettMichael Barnett, PA506 N Armenia Ave.Tampa, FL 33609-1703813 870-3100https://hillsboroughbankruptcy.com .  

This article originally appeared in politicalsay on February 19, 2021 at https://politicsay.com/ag-letitia-james-wont-sue-nyc-over-taxi-medallion-debt/AG Letitia James won’t sue NYC over taxi medallion debt New York Attorney General Letitia James has abandoned her threat to sue New York City into providing financial relief to taxi drivers burdened by debt from medallions purchased at inflated costs at city-sponsored auctions, her office said Thursday.James had threatened to sue last February — warning the city and its Taxi and Limousine Commission that it had 30 days to fork over the money.But 30 days came and went and James did not take action. On Thursday, her office argued a lawsuit would take years to settle, delaying financial benefits for drivers.Instead, James has endorsed a proposal from the New York Taxi Worker’s Alliance to write medallion loans down to $125,000.“This proposal would provide a fiscally fair and responsible way to support the recovery of the taxi medallion industry by guaranteeing loans written down to no more than $125,000, which is why I have been working with the city to approve it since last year,” James said in a statement to Crain’s.“This relief package not only lays out the best way to support the needs of a community that has been economically devastated right now without burdensome and drawn-out litigation, but will help to ensure justice is finally delivered for thousands of medallion owners.”Last year’s threat to sue came after an investigation by the AG’s office concluded that the city made “over $855 million” off medallion auctions between 2002 and 2014, despite knowing as early as 2011 that the medallions were selling at higher than their actual value.Drivers have demonstrated for months in support of NYTWA’s relief proposal. A competing plan from U.S. Congressman Ritchie Torres (D-The Bronx) proposed to re-peg the value of medallions at $250,000.NYTWA Director Bhairavi Desai lamented the decision not to pursue the city in court, but welcomed James’ support for her group’s bailout plan.“We know it’s because of technicalities and status of limitations, but it doesn’t make it less painful and infuriating that so many ex-city officials have gotten away with destroying drivers’ lives,” Desai told The Post.“Our proposal is the only way forward, not just for survival but also for an ounce of justice.

Summary: Emily Bennett owned an real property in fee simple in Rockingham County. In December 2019, she executed a Power of Attorney appointing Lisa Bennett-Smith as her attorney-in-fact. A few days later on December 9, 2016, Ms. Bennett-Smith transferred the … Bankr. M.D.N.C.: Anderson v. Bennett-Smith- Contructively Fraudulent Transfer and Recovery of Asset by Trustee Read More »