https://www.fastcompany.com/90373231/i-filed-for-bankruptcy-and-it-was-the-best-decision-i-made

“What was that? Law and Order?” Today I was at the bankruptcy court asking the Judge to approve two credit card reaffirmations. One for a little more than $500; one for a little less. Both because my clients had a good relationship going back years with their credit union. So they wanted to keep them.  […] The post Reaffirmation: It’s like an episode of Law and Order. by Robert Weed appeared first on Robert Weed - AE.

Another Taxi Medallion Workout Success StoryCrains New York reported on July 11, 2019 that an auction of 16 medallions at an East Elmhurst, Queens, hotel came to an early end, with just three sales and a top price of $138,000.Regrettably, this article demonstrates that taxi medallions continue to drop in price.  As many readers of this blog know, Jim Shenwick has developed a niche practice representing “underwater’ taxi medallion owners. The strategies used by Jim Shenwick in taxi medallion workouts are as follows: First, he does asset protection planning under New York State law to make sure that if the negotiations are not successful, or the taxi medallion owner needs to file bankruptcy, as few assets or property of the medallion owner would be available to creditors or the bankruptcy trustee. Second, he commences aggressive negotiations with the bank (that holds the medallion loan), seeking that they “take back” the underwater medallion. This is known as a “walkaway”, or a “surrender”, of the medallion and it is a form of “out of court” workout. There are tax implications regarding the take back of a medallion by a bank under Section 108 of the Internal Revenue code, and those issues have been discussed in prior blog posts by Jim Shenwick.Third, if the out-of-court negotiations do not work, in appropriate cases Jim advises the medallion owner to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy (also discussed in prior blog posts). Fourth, if neither of the options described above work, Jim then seeks a modification of the medallion loan with the bank.Recently, Jim Shenwick concluded a successful negotiation regarding a medallion loan modification and the facts and strategy are discussed below.The facts: An individual owned one taxi medallion subject to a loan on the medallion in the amount of $650,000. The individual also owned a house in Nassau County with a fair market value of approximately $600,000 and the house was not subject to a mortgage. The medallion was being leased out by a management company and the cash flow from the lease was not covering the monthly loan payment to the bank (a common problem). For several months, the client had been using money from their savings and checking account (out of pocket) to make up the difference. However, based on the property that the client owned and their age, they would be unable to make those payments indefinitely and they were nervous and stressed about their situation.The Strategy: Jim Shenwick was retained to begin negotiations with the bank. Based on the value of the house and the amount of equity in the house, the bank indicated that they would not accept a surrender of the medallion. He then agreed to a modification of the medallion loan so that after the modification, the cash flow generated from the leasing of the medallion would equal the monthly medallion loan payments- the loan would be cash flow neutral.While the result was not as ideal as a surrender of the medallion, under the circumstances at that  time, it was the best solution for the client. The modification eliminated the need for litigation and a bankruptcy filing by the client. In the case of bankruptcy, based on the equity in the house, the client would have lost their house.In a loan modification there are four variables: 1) The amount of the loan 2) The interest rate on the loan 3) The term of the loan 4) The amortization schedule for the loan.  Once these four variables are determined, a loan amortization table can be used to determine the monthly loan payments.Let's now discuss those factors and how they applied to the medallion loan modification.  First, Jim asked the bank to write the loan down to the value of the medallion and the they refused (the amount of the loan for purposes of the loan modification was $650,000). Second, the bank agreed to an interest rate of 3.75% for the modification. Third, the bank agreed to a two-year term for the loan. The client requested a three to five-year loan repayment term, but the bank refused. Fourth, the bank advised that the loan be interest only to lower the monthly payments- which the client agreed to.Based on the above factors, the parties agreed to modify the loan. After the modification, the cash flow generated from leasing out the medallion equaled the monthly loan payments and the medallion owner/ borrower no longer had to “go into their pocket” to cover the monthly payments.While the solution was not perfect, under the facts and circumstances of this case it was the best result for the client. Effectively, we have “kicked the can” down the road for two years with the hope that medallions will increase in value during that period of time. If medallions do not increase in value, the client can either do another loan modification, seek a surrender of the loan, or file for bankruptcy.Anyone who is interested in discussing an underwater taxi medallion loan modification or similar strategy is advised to contact Jim Shenwick

I just finished a survey of people who filed bankruptcy with me three years ago. Here’s one big thing I found out: credit scores three years after bankruptcy are almost the national average.   Right about half of the people who filed bankruptcy with me three years ago have a score above 670. A 670 score […] The post Credit scores after bankruptcy are close to national average, in just three years by Robert Weed appeared first on Robert Weed - AE.

Pennsylvania Bankruptcy Q&A Bankruptcy can be confusing, which is why The Law Offices of David M. Offen is here to help! We have prepared this educational Q&A to answer some of the most frequent bankruptcy questions and help Pennsylvanians better understand the process of bankruptcy. This Q&A is not legal counsel, and you should contact a bankruptcy attorney for specific advice on your personal situation. Mr. Offen’s law office has helped over 10,000 clients get free of debt through bankruptcy. For a free bankruptcy consultation, call (215) 625-9600 today. Q. What Exactly is Bankruptcy? A. Bankruptcy is a legal process for settling the finances of a person or business that cannot pay their debts. For individuals, filing bankruptcy triggers a series of legal protections, including a temporary freeze on debt collection, repossessions, and foreclosures. A successful bankruptcy will result in most debts (except certain debt like school loans) being discharged. Q. What Can Bankruptcy Do For Me? A. The purpose of filing bankruptcy is to have your debts discharged. This means you will not be legally obligated to pay these debts anymore. Filing bankruptcy can stop harassment from creditors and debt collection agencies. Filing triggers an automatic stay on their actions, and successfully completing bankruptcy means there will be nothing for them to collect on. Bankruptcy can also stop foreclosure, wage garnishment, and car repossession. Q. What kinds of debt can bankruptcy eliminate? A. Bankruptcy can eliminate (legally known as discharge) most consumer debt. All unsecured debt can be discharged. Credit cards and medical bills are the most common sources of unsecured debt, and a successful bankruptcy will discharge these entirely, even if you can’t pay the full balance. Bankruptcy can also eliminate secured debts like car loans and mortgages. However, you will either need to enter a payment plan to keep the property or relinquish the property. Bankruptcy may also be able to eliminate second mortgages or reduce vehicle loan payments in certain circumstances. Q. What are priority debts? A. Certain kinds of debts cannot be discharged through bankruptcy. These are known as priority debts. They must be paid before other creditors and paid in full. Priority debts include taxes, child support, and criminal restitution. Student loans which are non-priority debts are also typically not dischargeable through Bankruptcy. Q. What is Chapter 7 Bankruptcy? A. Chapter 7 bankruptcy, also known as liquidation or straight bankruptcy, involves liquidating your assets to pay creditors. It is designed for lower wage earners to seek relief from debt. You are protected by exemptions on certain kinds of property, and in most cases, your lawyer may be able to arrange these exemptions so you do not have to lose any property at all. To qualify for Chapter 7 bankruptcy you must qualify through the means test. This is based on the mean household income in your area. If you make less, you automatically qualify to file Chapter 7. If your income is above the median in your area, you will have to calculate your disposable income, after necessary deductions have been calculated for housing, food, etc. This may leave you with no disposable income and qualify you for filing Chapter 7. Q. What is Chapter 13 Bankruptcy? A. Chapter 13 bankruptcy is usually designed for higher wage earners who are saddled with debilitating debt. Unlike Chapter 7, no assets are liquidated. Instead, your debts are restructured into a payment plan spread over three years to five years, depending on if your income falls above or below the state median respectively. For this period, your disposable income will be put first towards priority debts and any secured debts you choose to keep, like a home mortgage or auto loan. The rest will go towards your unsecured debts. In addition, many individuals file Chapter 13 Bankruptcy for the sole reason of saving their home when it is in mortgage foreclosure or a real estate tax foreclosure. Chapter 13 allows an individual a three to five year period of time to cure the arrears owed on the mortgage or real estate taxes while you continue to pay the regular current mortgage or current real estate taxes. Furthermore, filing Chapter 13 Bankruptcy currently allows you regain possession of your vehicle that has been repossessed by the creditor. Q. What are bankruptcy exemptions? A. Bankruptcy exemptions are a list of the types and dollar values of property which are protected from liquidation during a bankruptcy. Both the Federal Bankruptcy Code and Pennsylvania state law offer sets of exemptions. A Pennsylvania resident may choose either set (but not both) to protect their personal property. Your bankruptcy attorney can help to decide which set is best for you in your specific case. Q. What property does Pennsylvania let me keep? A. Pennsylvania will allow you to claim the federal or the state set of exemptions. Federal exemptions have recently been updated to reflect the consumer price index. Generous Federal exemptions allow you to keep up to $25,150 in home value and $13,400 in household goods. In addition there are other Federal exemptions as well. These protections stack if you are filing bankruptcy jointly with your spouse. For full details on the most recent federal exemption set, we’ve prepared a comprehensive review and comparison of the Federal and Pennsylvania exemption sets. Q. I’m married. Can I file bankruptcy separately? A. You can file bankruptcy individually, but there are several disadvantages. While you will be released from jointly owed debts, they will revert to your spouse, not be erased. Unless you and your spouse are separated, this would mean your household income would still go towards paying the debt. You will also lose the ability to stack exemptions, meaning you might have to surrender property to your bankruptcy trustee which would be protected in a joint filing. Q. Will bankruptcy erase my student loans? A. College loans, as a general rule, cannot be discharged. There is an extremely narrow exemption to discharge student loans for undue hardship, but in practice, this relief is rarely granted. When it is granted, the “hardship” is on the order of a severe injury or other severe disability, never difficulty paying bills. Q. How will bankruptcy affect my credit? A. Bankruptcy’s effect on your credit is largely determined by your previous credit history. While everyone’s score drops after filing, some long-term, overleveraged debtors might not see as much of a change after a bankruptcy as someone of historically good credit saddled with an unexpectedly large debt. The fact that you filed, and had any accounts discharged, will be visible for 7 years on your credit score. Smart credit use can build your score back within a relatively short period of time, and by the time your bankruptcy disappears it is more than possible to be in the high score range. If you have any questions about bankruptcy in Pennsylvania it’s important to contact the Law Offices of David M. Offen. With over 20 years of experience, David M. Offen has helped over 10,000 clients through the bankruptcy process. Call his offices today at (215) 625-9600 to schedule a free consultation. The post Pennsylvania Bankruptcy Q&A appeared first on Bankruptcy Lawyer in Philadelphia PA | David M. Offen Attorney at Law.

Dealing with the death of a loved one can be a traumatizing experience. This experience can be even more stressful if you are unable to pay the costs to bury your loved one. A funeral can cost a person an average of about $7,000, which can be difficult to pay if you did not expect […] The post Can You File Bankruptcy on Funeral Expenses in PA or NJ? appeared first on .

https://ny.curbed.com/2019/7/8/20686319/nyc-taxi-medallion-owners-brokers-predatory-practices-tlc

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/08/nyregion/nyc-taxi-medallion-bailout.html

   Two of the more common adversary complaints against debtors in bankruptcy are objections to dischargeability under §§523(a)(2)(A) and 523(a)(6).  The District Court for the Southern District of New York recently affirmed a ruling in favor of the debtor with a detailed analysis of the law in Reddy v Melnick, 2019 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 110330, Case# 3:18-CV-1197 (S.D. N.Y. 2 July 2019).  The adversary proceeding was founded on a sale and financing of the purchase price of a dental practice from Reddy to Melnik.  Melnik subsequently defaulted on the payments to Reddy, and filed for relief under chapter 7.  Reddy then sought to have the debt determined nondischargeable under §523(a)(2)(A) for material misrepresentation, and under §523(a)(6) for transferring patient records to another practice.  The complaint under §523(a)(2)(A) asserted that Melnik misrepresented his marital status in the application.  The bankruptcy court had determined that a) such misrepresentation was not material to the decision to sell the practice to Melnick give the use of a professional broker to mediate the transactions, b) there was no reliance on such representation before or at the time of the representation, and c) there was no evidence of fraudulent intent given the Debtor's credible testimony that he wanted to run a successful practice at the time he entered the transaction, and only later discovered the practice was not the 'turn-key' operation he had been led to expect; and that he had made payments on the lease and note and attempted to resell the practice when he determined he could not afford it.    In reviewing the bankruptcy court's decision, the appellate court first examined the statute.Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), "[a] discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt — . . . for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by— (A) false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor's or an insider's financial condition."  11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A).   This section requires a creditor to show by a preponderance of the evidence five elements 1) the debtor made a misrepresentation; 2) the debtor knew the representation was false at the time it was made; 3) the representation was made with the intent to deceive the creditor; 4) the creditor relied on the representation; and 5) the creditor was injured by the representation and suffered damages as a result.1  In the case of a false representation a creditor must show 1) the debtor made a false or misleading statement 2) with intent to deceive, 3) in order for the creditor to turn over money or property to the debtor.  In the case an action for false pretense rather than a false statement, conduct that makes an implication that is misleading is required.  In either case, the creditor must prove misrepresentation, scienter, reliance, and harm.2   Reddy alleged misrepresentations as to marital status, that the financing was short term, and that Melnik failed to disclose child support and alimony obligations.  The District Court found that Reddy failed to show that it was Melnik that made the representations as to the term of the financing, instead having been made by the broker.  Reddy admitted that it did not ask Melnik for information about alimony or child support, not for any financial information at all; rather Reddy alleges it got such information from the broker, and offered no evidence that Melnik withheld information about such obligations from such brokers.  As to the marital status, Reddy has not shown that Melnik made such statements that he was married to Ms. Melnik-Stuart with the intent to deceive Reddy to both selling him the practice and extending financing.  Fraudulent intent cannot be presumed and any permissible inference will be negated when the debtor comes forward with some evidence that he did not intend to deceive the plaintiff.3  The trial court's finding as the the credibility of Melnik was supported in the record.  There is no evidence that at the time Melnik entered into the transactions without a good faith intent to fulfill his contractual obligations.  Rather the actions by Melnik and his ex-wife reflect an intent to work in the practice as expected.  Two payments were mad eon the agreement, he applied for insurance company affiliations at the practice location even before the sale was final, both Melnik and the ex-wife spent time working at the practice, Melnik spent money for advertising, and the ex-wife left her job in New York City to move to an apartment they rented in Syracuse.  The record showed that the ex-wife's decision to leave the practice and Melnik's inability to repay the loan were both based on events occurring after the sale and financing, and are therefore not indicative of a lack of good faith at the time of the transaction.   Though Melnik and the ex-wife were not married at the time of the transaction, Melnik testified they continued to have a relationship, were attempting to reconcile, and intended to to run the business together.  Nor was the court convinced that Reddy satisfied his burden to show that the misrepresentations as to marital status were material or that Reddy relied on them.  There were inconsistencies in Reddy's testimony in depositions and at trial as to such reliance.  The evidence shows that rather than relying on the marital status, the reliance was more to the effect that the ex-spouse would be working at the practice in certain capacities to make things run smoothly and reduce overhead.  As to the court under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6) the court also found a lack of evidence meeting the creditor's burden of proof.  This section provides"[a] discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt — . . . for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity."   11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6).Willful requires deliberate or intentional conduct, while malicious means wrongful or without just cause or excuse, even in the absence of personal hatred, spite, or ill-will.4  Reddy alleges that Melnik's actions in transferring patient files to a nearby Aspen Dental location destroyed the remaining goodwill in the practice, and made it impossible for Reddy to resell the practice to someone else.   The Bankruptcy Court determined that the transfer occurred after Reddy commenced eviction proceedings and after rejecting an offer related to the sale of the practice to a third party; and that the transfer did not suggestion tortious conduct by Melnik.  While noting numerous personal attacks against Melnik's character in creditor's briefs, the District Court found no citation to actual evidence supporting the claim.  At the time Melnik sent the patients letters announcing the closing of the practice the 'new buyer' had not yet entered a contract for such purchase.   Melnik testified that he was willing to sell the practice, but Reddy imposed conditions on Melnik, including that Melnik would be liable for the entire debt if the new buyer defaulted, and that Melnik would be required to make a large up-front payment of all past due amounts plus rent and fees until the sale was finalized, and that Melnik would not file bankruptcy, that Melnik could not agree to.  Also, as the time of the negotiations as to such sale Melnik had already been evicted from the premises, such that the decision to close the practice was more a matter of practical necessity than a malicious action.  Thus the Bankruptcy Court's finding that the debt was discharged was sustained on appeal.1 In re Williams, 579 B.R. 314, 323 (S.D.N.Y. Bankr. 2016)↩2 In re Cahill, 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 501, 2017 WL 713565, at *7 (citing Husky Int'l Elecs., Inc. v. Ritz, 136 S.Ct. 1581, 1586, 194 L. Ed. 2d 655 [2016]; Evans v. Ottimo, 469 F.3d 278, 283 [2d Cir. 2006])↩3 In re Williams, 579 B.R. at 323↩4 In re Stelluti, 94 F.3d 84, 87-88 (2d Cir. 1996).↩Michael BarnettMichael Barnett, PA506 N Armenia Ave.Tampa, FL 33609-1703813 870-3100https://hillsboroughbankruptcy.com

https://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Business_amp_Money_12/Bankruptcy-An-option-for-student-loan-debt.shtml