This article orginally appeared in Cranes New York Business on August 13, 2020 at  https://www.crainsnewyork.com/transportation/taxi-commission-fails-regulate-uber-and-lyft-under-two-year-old-city-law--------------Taxi commission fails to regulate Uber and Lyft under two-year-old city lawBRIAN PASCUS The city’s taxi enforcement agency known for its heavy hand with drivers has neglected to implement a two-year-old law aimed at helping yellow taxis compete with Uber and Lyft as the ride-hail apps roiled the industry.Local Law 149, signed by Mayor Bill de Blasio and enacted Aug. 14, 2018, created the category of High Volume For Hire Services—companies that handle more than 10,000 rides a day—and required them to apply for a special permit through the Taxi and Limousine Commission. Under the regulation they must turn over records, including driver compensation, environmental impact, financial impact and other information, that could result in further restrictions on them. So far, both Uber and Lyft have applied for the permits, but the TLC has not approved their applications.“The TLC failed to timely enact regulations and enact the legislation which their chair asked for,” said Christopher Lynn, a TLC commissioner from 1996 to 1998. “In other words, the TLC did everything else except level the playing field and hold Uber accountable.”The law sought to provide greater transparency of companies, such as Uber and Lyft, whose fleet of cars had risen exponentially in the city beginning in 2011 at the expense of traditional yellow taxi drivers and livery black car taxis, leading many of these drivers to fall into bankruptcy and despair. There were several taxi-industry suicides before the law’s passage. For taxi medallion owners, the TLC’s lack of enforcement is nothing short of a betrayal of its mission to regulate and protect the yellow cab medallion industry. “I expected the TLC to enforce the rules that they’ve had on the books for many years, which would’ve prevented many of the excessive for-hire vehicles from ever being on the road,” said Carolyn Protz, a taxi medallion owner. “The TLC hasn’t done anything. They haven’t held the app companies to the rules they were supposed to create.” More than that, industry insiders say, the city could be leaving money uncollected during an extreme budget crisis. The penalty for companies operating without the High Volume For Hire Service license is a $10,000 fine each day the violation is in place. The law explicitly states it is unlawful for these types of companies to operate unless licensed by the TLC. But emails and legal documents obtained by Crain’s show that Uber and Lyft have been operating in New York without an approved high-volume license for two years. During a July 23, 2019, public hearing before the TLC, Uber noted that the status of its high-volume license, which had been submitted to the TLC, was still pending. That September the TLC testified that it was in the process of implementing the law.Not much changed nearly a year later. An email exchange from June 18 of this year between Kala Wright, the TLC's deputy commissioner for policy, and Protz confirmed that Uber, Lyft and Via were still operating without an approved license as late as 20 months after the City Council passed the bill. “Hi Carolyn, thanks for following up, the [high-volume] licenses are still under review, all of the company's (sic) have submitted their application materials,” Wright wrote at the time.Lyft confirmed that it has not heard back from the TLC on its application."The TLC has yet to issue formal [high-volume] licenses or provide indication of when those should be expected," Lyft representative Campbell Matthews said.Uber and Via did not respond to a request for comment. For its part, the TLC has said that it’s done nothing wrong, but the agency failed to make clear why it has delayed subjecting the ride-hail apps to the law. “Uber and Lyft are indeed fully licensed and will remain so while their HVFHV applications are being processed,” said Allan Fromberg, a spokesman for the TLC, using the designation for high volume for-hire vehicles. Medallion owners, such as Protz, can’t understand how the TLC could turn a blind eye to the regulations established under a new law explicitly passed to level the playing field among all drivers and ride-share companies. “The TLC is really rogue. They just ignored what they were told to do by the City Council,” she said. Baked into Local Law 149 are a few different licensing requirements that Uber and Lyft must comply with to be licensed under the law. These requirements include a list of bases through which the companies will dispatch trips, a business plan with trip volumes, a vehicle count, accessibility requirements and an impact analysis.The impact analysis assesses the effect of a prospective licensee’s operation on the environment and documents the applicant’s impact on traffic congestion, public transportation, private motor vehicles and noise in the city area. It is thought that these regulations—notably a comprehensive account of the environmental impact tens of thousands of Uber and Lyft vehicles have on the city's environment—would complicate, if not prove detrimental, to the ride-share companies. City Council Speaker Corey Johnson said agency representatives testified to the council in September 2019 that they were working on implementing the law. “The council passed laws regulating for-hire vehicles with the expectation that the TLC would implement and enforce them as soon as possible, so it's frustrating to hear this is taking so long,” Johnson said. “I urge the TLC to take action quickly to fix this situation and comply with the law we passed.”Bronx Councilman Ruben Diaz Sr., who introduced the bill, has called on Attorney General Letitia James to investigate what he said is lack of oversight by the TLC. Councilman Ritchie J. Torres, who chairs the Oversights and Investigations Committee, said he was “deeply disturbed” by the allegations that the TLC is circumventing local law. “No agency gets to pick and choose the laws it wishes to follow,” Torres spokesman Raymond Rodriguez said. “The TLC has an obligation to faithfully follow all local laws, and Local Law 149 is by no means an exception.” For medallion owners, who have seen their livelihood altered in the face of the ride-share onslaught, the failure of the TLC and the de Blasio administration to implement Local Law 149 has dramatically altered the city’s transportation landscape. “They damaged public transportation, increased pollution, increased congestion, destroyed a $15 billion taxi medallion franchise and created poverty among all the drivers,” Protz said. “And they’ve done all that for nothing.”

In Chapter 13, Don’t Bounce Your Checks! Please don’t bounce your checks, when paying the Chapter 13 Trustee. At least here in Northern Virginia, after two bounced checks, they require you to start sending money orders.  Money orders are expensive, hard to get during the pandemic, and even harder to trace if they are lost […] The post In Chapter 13, Don’t Bounce Your Checks! by Robert Weed appeared first on Northern VA Bankruptcy Lawyer Robert Weed.

This article originally appeared in the New York Times at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/11/nyregion/nyc-economy-chain-stores.html---------------------Retail Chains Abandon Manhattan: ‘It’s Unsustainable’Some national chains, both retail and restaurants, are closing outlets in New York City, which are struggling more than their branches elsewhere.A Gap store near Rockefeller Center. Many companies have kept their stores closed in New York, even as they have opened stores in other parts of the country. A Gap store near Rockefeller Center. Many companies have kept their stores closed in New York, even as they have opened stores in other parts of the country. Credit...Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesBy Matthew Haag and Patrick McGeehanAug. 11, 2020For years, Bryant Park Grill & Cafe in Midtown Manhattan has been one of the country’s top-grossing restaurants, the star property in Ark Restaurants’ portfolio of 20 restaurants across the United States.But what propelled it to the top has vanished.The tourists are gone, the office towers surrounding it are largely empty and the restaurant’s 1,000-seat dining room is closed. Instead, dinner is cooked and served on its patio, and the scaled-down restaurant brings in about $12,000 a day — an 85 percent plunge in revenue, its chief executive said.Five months into the pandemic, the drastic turn of events at businesses like Bryant Park Grill & Cafe that are part of national chains shows how the economic damage in New York has in many cases been far worse than elsewhere in the country.In the heart of Manhattan, national chains including J.C. Penney, Kate Spade, Subway and Le Pain Quotidien have shuttered branches for good. Many other large brands, like Victoria’s Secret and the Gap, have kept their high-profile locations closed in Manhattan, while reopening in other states.Michael Weinstein, the chief executive of Ark Restaurants, who owns Bryant Park Grill & Cafe and 19 other restaurants, said he will never open another restaurant in New York.ImageA Uniqlo store on Fifth Avenue. Many businesses in Manhattan are struggling because of a lack of tourists and a relatively small number of office workers. A Uniqlo store on Fifth Avenue. Many businesses in Manhattan are struggling because of a lack of tourists and a relatively small number of office workers. Credit...Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesOf Ark Restaurants’ five Manhattan restaurants, only two have reopened, while its properties in Florida — where the virus is far worse — have expanded outdoor seating with tents and tables into their parking lots, serving almost as many guests as they had indoors.“There’s no reason to do business in New York,” Mr. Weinstein said. “I can do the same volume in Florida in the same square feet as I would have in New York, with my expenses being much less. The idea was that branding and locations were important, but the expense of being in this city has overtaken the marketing group that says you have to be there.”Even as the city has contained the virus and slowly reopens, there are ominous signs that some national brands are starting to abandon New York. The city is home to many flagship stores, chains and high-profile restaurants that tolerated astronomical rents and other costs because of New York’s global cachet and the reliable onslaught of tourists and commuters.But New York today looks nothing like it did just a few months ago.In Manhattan’s major retail corridors, from SoHo to Fifth Avenue to Madison Avenue, once packed sidewalks are now nearly empty. A fraction of the usual army of office workers goes into work every day, and many wealthy residents have left the city for second homes.An H&M store on Fifth Avenue is open, but other stores along the famous thoroughfare are still shut. An H&M store on Fifth Avenue is open, but other stores along the famous thoroughfare are still shut. Credit...Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesMany stores are still closed, some permanently, while those that are open have very little foot traffic.For four months, the Victoria’s Secret flagship store at Herald Square in Manhattan has been closed and not paying its $937,000 monthly rent. “It will be years before retail has even a chance of returning to New York City in its pre-Covid form,” the retailer’s parent company recently told its landlord in a legal document.“In the prime real estate areas, all the stores rely on having half international tourists and half local tourists or those from the local neighborhoods,” said Thiago Hueb, a founder of a jewelry company who had decided to close his flagship store on Madison Avenue before the pandemic struck because of high rents.Now brokers are calling him trying to lure him back to the block, but Mr. Hueb, whose jewelry is sold in 80 department stores nationwide, is not interested.“The avenue is no longer what it used to be,” he said.J.C. Penney and Neiman Marcus, the anchor tenants at two of the largest malls in Manhattan, recently filed for bankruptcy and announced that they would shutter those locations.The Neiman Marcus at Hudson Yards, the first in New York City, had only opened last year, with its name adorning the outside of the luxury mall — the centerpiece of the country’s largest private development.ImageVictoria’s Secret’s flagship store in Midtown Manhattan has remained closed for months, and its owners have stopped paying rent. Victoria’s Secret’s flagship store in Midtown Manhattan has remained closed for months, and its owners have stopped paying rent. Credit...Hiroko Masuike/The New York TimesSome popular chains, like Shake Shack and Chipotle, report that their stores in New York were performing worse than others elsewhere, investment analysts said. A few dozen Subway locations have closed in New York City in recent months. Le Pain Quotidien has permanently closed several of its 27 stores in the city and plans to leave others closed until more people return to the streets, said Andrew Stern, co-chief executive of the chain’s parent, Aurify Brands.A Gap Store near Rockefeller Center has stayed closed and has not paid its $264,000 monthly rent. Two T.G.I. Friday’s in prime locations, one near Rockefeller Center and another in Times Square, have remained closed while its restaurants elsewhere in the country have reopened.Anyone in the food and dining business is really suffering right now,” said Vin McCann, a restaurant consultant with Heyer Performance in Lower Manhattan. “I think that’s true in all the boroughs.”New York’s stringent lockdown and methodical reopening may have brought the virus to heel, Mr. McCann said, but it is also wreaking havoc on businesses with so few people going to work, virtually no visitors and many residents “a little loath to go out” and worried for their health.“There’s going to be a lot of pain,’’ he added.Landlords have started filing lawsuits against commercial tenants for not paying rent, accusing some national brands of trying to take advantage of the crisis.A Zara store in Manhattan. J.C. Penney and Neiman Marcus, which anchor two of Manhattan’s largest malls, have declared bankruptcy and are closing their stores there. A Zara store in Manhattan. J.C. Penney and Neiman Marcus, which anchor two of Manhattan’s largest malls, have declared bankruptcy and are closing their stores there. Credit...Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times“SL Green and landlords across the city have worked with retailers large and small to protect jobs and New York’s tax base during this crisis,” said Stephen Meister, a lawyer representing SL Green, which leases the Herald Square store to Victoria’s Secret.But, he added, “Victoria’s Secret is a multibillion-dollar, publicly traded conglomerate exploiting the situation in an attempt to avoid paying its contractual rent obligations.’’The store’s parent company, L Brands, did not respond to a request for comment.A spokeswoman for Related, the developer of Hudson Yards, said the company remained bullish on the future of retail in New York City despite the closing of Neiman Marcus and the economic downturn.“Retail at Hudson Yards was off to a strong start before this crisis hit, and we firmly believe that fashion and retail will always remain core to the vibrancy of New York,” the spokeswoman, Kathleen Corless, said.New York’s shutdown dealt an especially painful blow to chains like Shake Shack that were born in the city and thrived as urban oases, said Nicole Miller Regan, who follows food chains for Piper Sandler in Minneapolis.“That’s always been their core strength from a home-field advantage,” Ms. Regan said.Shake Shack reported on July 30 that it had experienced a 40 percent decline in revenue in the second quarter and that its stores in big cities like New York “were most impacted by the Covid-19 outbreak.”They eventually reopened to serve takeout and deliveries, but they did not rebound as well as the company’s suburban locations that have drive-up windows where customers can avoid all but the briefest interaction, Ms. Regan said.“The drive-through is the channel that consumers feel most comfortable with,” she said.Like Shake Shack, Chipotle told investors that its stores in the Northeast, including New York, were underperforming the rest of the chain, said Nick Setyan, an analyst with Wedbush Securities in Los Angeles.The main reason. Mr. Setyan said, is that “people just aren’t going to work” in much of Manhattan.For Veggie Grill, a California-based chain of 35 restaurants, New York is “the most difficult market for us to operate in right now,” said Jay Gentile, the company’s chief operating officer.After three years of planning, Veggie Grill, which serves plant-based sandwiches and salads, opened its first New York restaurant in the Flatiron district in December.Now it’s struggling to keep the place open with a pared-down staff, and sales that have fallen about 80 percent from before the pandemic, Mr. Gentile said.“In New York City, there is next to no lunch business,” he said. “No one’s coming in from Connecticut. No one’s coming in from New Jersey.”And, there are no tourists wandering the streets, he added.The story is different at some of the company’s restaurants on the West Coast, which are now doing as much business lately as they did a year ago, he said.The shutdown and phased reopening of the city presented challenges that derailed Veggie Grill’s expansion plans.Three months after opening, Mr. Gentile had to lay off all 70 of its New York employees, including a general manager who was supposed to oversee the addition of three locations in the city. In May, the company hired back about 24 of the workers with expectations that business would pick up as the city reopened.Now, the staff is down to 16 employees, only two of whom work full-time.“We have two hours at lunch and 2½ hours at dinner to make our money,” he said. “We’re still paying very high rent. It’s unsustainable.”Despite all the hardships, Mr. Gentile said he’s determined to keep the doors open. “If we close New York down,’’ he said, “then we would have to close it for good.’’

Securing Your Assets When Filing for Bankruptcy Bankruptcy is a valuable legal tool that can help you get out from under the burden of rising debt. Some have a stereotypical notion of bankruptcy in their minds that includes only very poor people who are living paycheck to paycheck and who don’t have anything of value. But the truth is that many people have valuable assets like homes, cars, and more when they consider bankruptcy – and they are worried about losing it all when they unload their debt. Fortunately, there are ways that you can protect your assets when filing for bankruptcy in Glendale. Here are some options you should discuss with and experienced Phoenix bankruptcy attorney: Use Exemptions If you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in Mesa, you will get the maximum debt relief. All of your unsecured credit card debt can be discharged under Chapter 7 bankruptcy. However, this form of bankruptcy also allows the bankruptcy court to seize your assets and sell them to pay your creditors before those debts are discharged. The good news is that there are exceptions. Chapter 7 bankruptcy allows you to keep certain assets, so long as they fall under certain amounts. The exemption amount varies by state, and it can vary at the state and federal level. So long as your asset is not worth than the exemption, you can keep it. For example, the exemption for a homestead in Arizona is $150,000. Your home may be worth more than that, but if you still owe a lot of money, it won’t be worth that much to you. If the equity you own in the home is under $150,000, you will be able to keep it after filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in Phoenix. Know Values Bankruptcy law outlines exemptions for other types of property, including household furnishings, vehicles, and even insurance accounts. The value of your property will be assessed to determine whether it can be exempt under these rules. It is important to understand how value is assessed. Value is determined based on what an item can currently sell for – not what you paid for it. For example, your husband may have paid zero dollars to give you his grandmother’s wedding ring, but if that ring can fetch a price on the secondary market, it may not be exempt from your bankruptcy proceedings. You need to talk through your assets with your Avondale bankruptcy attorney to get an idea for how the bankruptcy court will value them. Value can be subjective, so you may be able to put up a fight for certain assets. File for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy If you have assets that won’t fall under the exemptions and you want to keep said assets, you may need to file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in Mesa instead. Chapter 13 bankruptcy allows you to keep your assets while putting you on a debt restructuring plan with one monthly payment that you are determined to be able to afford. The payment plan lasts for three to five years, and any debt remaining at the end of the term may be discharged. You’ll need to talk with a bankruptcy attorney serving Gilbert to understand how filing for bankruptcy may impact your assets and what your options may be. Every case is unique, so there is no one-size-fits-all answer for how your debts and your assets will be handled. Your bankruptcy attorney in Arizona will review all your financial circumstances and will offer detailed guidance about how bankruptcy may help you. Your attorney will help you determine the best strategy to get the maximum debt relief while also losing the least amount of assets (preferably none). Call My AZ Lawyers if you are in Arizona and are thinking of filing for bankruptcy. A bankruptcy attorney from our team will review your finances and help you understand your options under bankruptcy law. Our attorneys are experienced and committed to helping you get the maximum debt relief under bankruptcy law. They will answer all your questions and help you understand your full rights and responsibilities. We serve clients throughout the Phoenix area, including Mesa, Tucson, and Glendale. Call us today to schedule a time to meet with a bankruptcy lawyer. You’ll soon learn why we are the top bankruptcy law office in the area. 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 Securing Your Assets When Filing for Bankruptcy appeared first on My AZ Lawyers.

Securing Your Assets When Filing for Bankruptcy Bankruptcy is a valuable legal tool that can help you get out from under the burden of rising debt. Some have a stereotypical notion of bankruptcy in their minds that includes only very poor people who are living paycheck to paycheck and who don’t have anything of value. But the truth is that many people have valuable assets like homes, cars, and more when they consider bankruptcy – and they are worried about losing it all when they unload their debt. Fortunately, there are ways that you can protect your assets when filing for bankruptcy in Glendale. Here are some options you should discuss with and experienced Phoenix bankruptcy attorney: Use Exemptions If you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in Mesa, you will get the maximum debt relief. All of your unsecured credit card debt can be discharged under Chapter 7 bankruptcy. However, this form of bankruptcy also allows the bankruptcy court to seize your assets and sell them to pay your creditors before those debts are discharged. The good news is that there are exceptions. Chapter 7 bankruptcy allows you to keep certain assets, so long as they fall under certain amounts. The exemption amount varies by state, and it can vary at the state and federal level. So long as your asset is not worth than the exemption, you can keep it. For example, the exemption for a homestead in Arizona is $150,000. Your home may be worth more than that, but if you still owe a lot of money, it won’t be worth that much to you. If the equity you own in the home is under $150,000, you will be able to keep it after filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in Phoenix. Know Values Bankruptcy law outlines exemptions for other types of property, including household furnishings, vehicles, and even insurance accounts. The value of your property will be assessed to determine whether it can be exempt under these rules. It is important to understand how value is assessed. Value is determined based on what an item can currently sell for – not what you paid for it. For example, your husband may have paid zero dollars to give you his grandmother’s wedding ring, but if that ring can fetch a price on the secondary market, it may not be exempt from your bankruptcy proceedings. You need to talk through your assets with your Avondale bankruptcy attorney to get an idea for how the bankruptcy court will value them. Value can be subjective, so you may be able to put up a fight for certain assets. File for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy If you have assets that won’t fall under the exemptions and you want to keep said assets, you may need to file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in Mesa instead. Chapter 13 bankruptcy allows you to keep your assets while putting you on a debt restructuring plan with one monthly payment that you are determined to be able to afford. The payment plan lasts for three to five years, and any debt remaining at the end of the term may be discharged. You’ll need to talk with a bankruptcy attorney serving Gilbert to understand how filing for bankruptcy may impact your assets and what your options may be. Every case is unique, so there is no one-size-fits-all answer for how your debts and your assets will be handled. Your bankruptcy attorney in Arizona will review all your financial circumstances and will offer detailed guidance about how bankruptcy may help you. Your attorney will help you determine the best strategy to get the maximum debt relief while also losing the least amount of assets (preferably none). Call My AZ Lawyers if you are in Arizona and are thinking of filing for bankruptcy. A bankruptcy attorney from our team will review your finances and help you understand your options under bankruptcy law. Our attorneys are experienced and committed to helping you get the maximum debt relief under bankruptcy law. They will answer all your questions and help you understand your full rights and responsibilities. We serve clients throughout the Phoenix area, including Mesa, Tucson, and Glendale. Call us today to schedule a time to meet with a bankruptcy lawyer. You’ll soon learn why we are the top bankruptcy law office in the area. Arizona Offices: Mesa Location: 1731 West Baseline Rd., Suite #100 Mesa, AZ 85202 Office: (480) 448-9800 Email: info@myazlawyers.com Website: http://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 Securing Your Assets When Filing for Bankruptcy appeared first on My AZ Lawyers.

This article originally appeared at Marketwatch.com on August 11, 2020, at https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-bankruptcies-on-track-for-10-year-high-with-more-than-100-consumer-companies-already-filing-2020-08-11--------------U.S. bankruptcies are en route to a 10-year high with 424 companies filing as of August 9, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence. The group's analysis took into account both public and private companies with public debt. The coronavirus has hit consumer companies hard, with more than 100 filing for bankruptcy including Men's Wearhouse parent Tailored Brands Inc. TLRD, +4.57%, department store Lord & Taylor and work wear retailer Brooks Brothers. Nearly 100 bankruptcies are in the energy and industrials sector. Oil-and-gas producer Chesapeake Energy Corp. CHKAQ, +5.28% and small-engine maker Briggs & Stratton Corp. are among the 35 companies that have filed with more than $1 billion in liabilities.

Tenant Bankruptcy and Eviction: FAQ for Tenants and Landlords in PA If you are a tenant facing eviction, you can use bankruptcy to temporarily “stop” or stay eviction proceedings. You can also get debt such as credit card debt and medical bills discharged, and in certain circumstances pay off past-due rent over time and stay in your rental property. If you are a landlord whose tenant filed bankruptcy, you have certain rights in your property and this article will explain them. You do not have to provide free housing to a tenant who is protected from eviction by bankruptcy. We’ve helped thousands of tenants exercise their rights in bankruptcy in Pennsylvania. Contact us to schedule your free, no-obligation consultation to find out all of your rights today. Bankruptcy and Eviction on Lease FAQ 1. Does Bankruptcy Protect You From Eviction? Yes, bankruptcy can stop eviction, temporarily. If you’ve received a Notice to Vacate, we can help you file bankruptcy. The automatic stay in bankruptcy stops eviction proceedings temporarily, buying you some time to plan your next move, whether it is to find somewhere else to live and save up for that, or, pay back your landlord or strike some other deal with your landlord to remain where you are. 2. If I File Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, Can I Still Be Evicted? Yes, eventually, if you continue to fail to pay rent. The automatic stay provides a temporary stay of eviction but when your Chapter 7 case closes in four to six months, your landlord can re-commence eviction proceedings. 3. I want to Stay in My Home, Can Bankruptcy Help Me? Yes. Filing either Chapter 7 bankruptcy or Chapter 13 bankruptcy will temporarily stop eviction proceedings. Filing Chapter 13 gives you the opportunity to pay past-due rent to your landlord through your 3- or 5-year plan. If you have steady income and can afford to do that, you may be able to stay in your home. During your free consultation, we will help you figure out if you can afford that. 4. Do Bankruptcies Remove Evictions? No. If you have already been evicted for failure to pay rent, that will remain on your credit report if your landlord reported the debt to the credit agencies. What a bankruptcy can do for you is to discharge any past-due rent you owe, so if you plan on moving and just need a little time to get things together, call us at (215) 625-9600 and we can help you file and get a fresh start. 5. I Filed Bankruptcy to Stop Eviction But My Landlord Filed a Stay Relief Motion. What Can I Do? Your options depend upon whether you filed under Chapter 7 or Chapter 13. If you filed under Chapter 7, your only option is to pay your landlord and if you cannot, the court will likely grant your landlord stay relief so that they can recommence eviction proceedings. If you filed under Chapter 13 and are making plan payments and paying rent to your landlord every post-petition month, your landlord must think there are still grounds to evict you. Are you damaging the property? What other argument can the landlord make to the court that you must be removed from the property? If you are facing a stay relief motion, don’t face it alone. Contact us and we will help you explore your options for remaining in your home. 6. I’m a Landlord and I Filed an Eviction Action Against My Tenant. Does Filing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Stop Eviction? Yes, temporarily. If your tenant has filed Chapter 7, the automatic stay will be in place during his or her case, which will last 4-6 months. The automatic stay stops eviction and any collection efforts against your tenant, so your eviction proceeding will be on hold. 7. There is a Stay of Eviction Because My Tenant Filed Bankruptcy, What Can I Do About It? A Landlord can file a Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay, which asks the court to lift the stay as to your eviction action and allow it to proceed. The court may be persuaded to lift the stay if your tenant is very far behind in rent and/or is damaging your property. We have helped many Pennsylvania clients to make arrangements with their landlord. Give us a call at (215) 625-9600 and we can get started right away with helping you. 8. My Tenant Filed Chapter 13 and I Received Notice that I’m to Be Paid through the Plan. What Does That Mean? If your tenant owes you rent and filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, he or she intends to pay you that past-due rent over the course of their Chapter 13 plan. This means that during the three to five year plan,  you will regularly get a check from the Chapter 13 trustee. This also means that your tenant must make each post-petition rent payment to you timely and in full. 9. My Tenant Filed Chapter 13 to Pay Past-Due Rent, But I Want That Tenant Out. What Can I Do? Many landlords wind up in this situation in PA.  They file an Objection to the Plan and cite reasons the plan is unacceptable. It may be that the plan the debtor proposed will not pay you enough through the plan, or, it may be that you object to the tenant staying in the property because they are causing damage. In any case, the window of time the landlord has to file an objection once the debtor proposes a plan is very brief, so the Landlord must act quickly as soon as he or she receives notice of debtor’s proposed plan. 10. My Tenant Filed Chapter 13 But is Not Paying Rent. What Can I Do? Again, the Landlord can ask the Court to get out of the Bankruptcy.  They file a Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay for nonpayment of rent. This will force the tenant to either pay or modify their plan to include those recently-missed payments. If they can’t do either, you will be granted stay relief and can commence eviction proceedings in state court. In Pennsylvania, both landlords and tenants have rights in bankruptcy when rental property and eviction actions are involved. You need an experienced bankruptcy attorney by your side to help you exercise those rights. Contact us today to schedule your free, no-obligation consultation. The post Bankruptcy and Eviction: What Landlords and Tenants Must Know appeared first on David M. Offen, Attorney at Law.

 As many readers of our blog and emails, Congress passed a new bankruptcy law known as Subchapter V. Information about that law can be found at our blog shenwick.blogspot.com. https://shenwick.blogspot.com/2020/06/how-subchapter-v-could-save-your-small.htmlNew Subchapter V is similar to chapter 13 of the bankruptcy code but it can only be used by a business, not an individual.Some creative uses of Subchapter V are  to discharge repayment of a PPP loan, to reject a commercial lease which a tenant no longer wants to occupy, or to reject unfavorable agreements.    Subchapter V became effective on February 19, 2020 and several decisions have been announced by various bankruptcy courts which are favorable to Debtors. First, if a company filed bankruptcy under Chapter 11 can they convert their case to a case under Subchapter V? Yes. In re Progressive Solutions, Inc., No. 8:18-bk-14277-SC, 2020 WL 975464, at *5 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. February 21, 2020) (small business designated Chapter 11 debtor could retroactively proceed under Subchapter V after the case had been pending approximately 15 months).-In re Glass Contractors, Inc., No. 20-40185 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. February 25, 2020) (small business designated Chapter 11 debtor could retroactively proceed under Subchapter V after the case had been pending approximately 1 month).-In re Body Transit, Inc., 613 B.R. 400 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. March 24, 2020) (small business designated Chapter 11 debtor could retroactively proceed under Subchapter V when the case had been pending 48 days).Second, can a debtor file under Subchapter V, if the debtor is not currently engaged in business? Yes, if a majority of its debt was business debt. -In re Wright, No. 20-01035-HB, 2020 WL 2193240, at *3 (Bankr. D.S.C. April 27, 2020) (debtor who was not currently engaged in business operations qualified as “small business debtor” where 56% of its debt amounted to residual business debt).Third, does a Subchapter 5 Bankruptcy Trustee have the automatic right to retain counsel? No. -In re Penland Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc., No. 20-01795-5-DMW, 2020 WL 3124585, at *_ (Bankr. E.D.N.C. June 11, 2020) (Bankruptcy Petition #: 20-01795-5-DMW) (denying Subchapter V trustee’s application to retain counsel, which was filed as a matter of course, because the need for legal representation had not arisen). A Subchapter V trustee may not retain legal counsel automatically like a bankruptcy trustee can do in a Chapter 7 case.Clients, accountants or lawyers who have questions regarding Subchapter V should contact Jim Shenwick at 212 541 6224  or jshenwick@gmail.com

Democratic Platform Promises Good News on Bankruptcy and Student Loans Are you struggling with student loans you can’t pay? The Democratic Platform promises to help. The platform of the 2020 Democratic National Convention says this: Democrats will restore the prior standard in bankruptcy law to allow borrowers with student loans to be able to discharge […] The post November Elections Might Help Bankruptcy Law and Your Student Loans by Robert Weed appeared first on Northern VA Bankruptcy Lawyer Robert Weed.

President Donald J. Trump knows a little something about bankruptcy. At least four of his casinos and hotels have filed voluntary reorganization petitions, but could his presidential campaign be placed into involuntary bankruptcy over unpaid security bills to cities? This hypothetical provides a great vehicle for discussing the mechanics of how an involuntary petition gets filed and the consequences arising from it.Some BackgroundThe President's campaign is a corporation named Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. When the President has campaign rallies, people show up. Some of those people don't like each other which requires that security be hired. According to published accounts, the President's campaign has failed to pay at least $1.8 million to fourteen cities for costs related to his rallies. Could those cities put the campaign into an involuntary bankruptcy?Involuntary Bankruptcy 101The requirements for an involuntary bankruptcy petition are set forth in 11 U.S.C. Sec. 303(b) which provides:(b) An involuntary case against a person is commenced by the filing with the bankruptcy court of a petition under chapter 7 or 11 of this title—(1) by three or more entities, each of which is either a holder of a claim against such person that is not contingent as to liability or the subject of a bona fide dispute as to liability or amount, or an indenture trustee representing such a holder, if such noncontingent, undisputed claims aggregate at least $10,000 more than the value of any lien on property of the debtor securing such claims held by the holders of such claims;(2) if there are fewer than 12 such holders, excluding any employee or insider of such person and any transferee of a transfer that is voidable under section 544, 545,547, 548, 549, or 724(a) of this title, by one or more of such holders that hold in the aggregate at least $10,000  of such claims.To initiate an involuntary petition, there must be at least three petitioning creditors if there are more at least twelve creditors. Since there are at least fourteen cities claiming unreimbursed costs, there would need to be three petitioning creditors.Next,the claims must not be the subject of a "bona fide dispute." This is a problem for our petitioning cities. According to the link I included above, the campaign denies all liability on the basis that it was the Secret Service that arranged for security. In order for a petitioning creditor to get past this, it would either need to have a signed contract with the Trump campaign or have had the campaign acknowledge liability.Assuming that three undisputed creditors can be found, the next step is to serve the debtor with a summons. Section 303(h) sets out the test in the event the petition is timely controverted:(h) If the petition is not timely controverted, the court shall order relief against the debtor in an involuntary case under the chapter under which the petition was filed. Otherwise, after trial, the court shall order relief against the debtor in an involuntary case under the chapter under which the petition was filed, only if—(1) the debtor is generally not paying such debtor’s debts as such debts become due unless such debts are the subject of a bona fide dispute as to liability or amount; or(2) within 120 days before the date of the filing of the petition, a custodian, other than a trustee, receiver, or agent appointed or authorized to take charge of less than substantially all of the property of the debtor for the purpose of enforcing a lien against such property, was appointed or took possession.Thus, there will be two issues at trial: whether there are three qualified petitioning creditors and whether the debtor is "generally not paying such debtor's debts as such debts become due unless such debts are the subject of a bona fide dispute." In our hypothetical, the campaign could reply that it is paying all of its nondisputed debts as they come due and provide campaign finance reports showing expenditures. They could also respond that the cities are losers who should have paid the President to visit them.Consequences of an Unsuccessful PetitionUnder our hypothetical, the Trump campaign would no doubt contest the petition and would stand a good chance of defeating it if it could show that it had not contracted for security with the cities and was paying lots of money out to consultants and for media buys and to stay at various Trump properties. Assuming that the Trump campaign defeats the petition, what are the consequences?This is covered by 11 U.S.C. Sec. 303(i) which states:(i) If the court dismisses a petition under this section other than on consent of all petitioners and the debtor, and if the debtor does not waive the right to judgment under this subsection, the court may grant judgment—(1) against the petitioners and in favor of the debtor for—(A) costs; or(B) a reasonable attorney’s fee; or(2) against any petitioner that filed the petition in bad faith, for—(A) any damages proximately caused by such filing; or(B) punitive damages.There are three options for remedies here. The first is an award of costs, which is the least severe. The second would be an award of attorneys' fees, which could be painful because according to a podcast I listened to the Trump campaign has already spent $14 million on attorneys and would likely pour a lot of money into defeating an involuntary petition. Finally, if the court found bad faith, it could award actual damage and punitive damages. In our hypothetical, the campaign accuses the cities of being losers and therefore anything they do must be in bad faith.ConclusionIn this hypothetical case, pursuing an involuntary petition against Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. could turn out very badly for the petitioning creditors. However, because they are municipalities, they could always file Chapter 9 to pay off the damages. The bottom line is that there are brightline tests to be met for filing an involuntary petition: three undisputed debts and a debtor not generally paying its undisputed debts as they come due. Attempting to file an involuntary petition can be expensive if it is not successful. Hat-tip: My partner Manny Newburger suggested this post to me.