In addition to Chapter 13, Chris Wesner’s law practice addresses Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. While Chapter 13 receives recognition as a process of reorganization, Chapter 7 Bankruptcy differs in that it is a process of liquidation. Chapter 7 is USUALLY the preferred chapter of bankruptcy when someone wants to completely eliminate all of their debts. Repayment plans do not exist in this scenario as individuals concerned seek to completely absolve themselves of high levels of debt. Chapter 7 presents itself as a viable alternative in the wake of hospital bills and other unanticipated expenses. Usually, these debts are so high that sliding payment plans across several years do little to dwindle the amount owed. Chapter 7 Bankruptcy contains certain restrictions that may prod someone to consult an experienced, knowledgable attorney. While the law office assists with credit card debt, it cannot, under current bankruptcy laws, help clients clear their: Alimony Child support Student loans Debts related to fraudulent activities If maintaining assets like housing and cars remains a priority, individuals may qualify for reaffirmation agreements, but existing debt cannot be discharged or forgiven for 6 years. Even before starting the process of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, an individual must meet expectations to make some kind of payment to address existing debt. Additionally, the reaffirmation process may seem complicated and fraught with grave decisions as individuals and families decide which possessions they keep while returning certain goods to past and present creditors. The information above only outlines the key components of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. As everyone’s financial status and immediate life circumstances can dramatically differ, it’s advisable to speak with a skilled bankruptcy attorney to determine your needs and eligibility for certain programs, including Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. If you or someone you know in Troy, Ohio seeks assistance in filing for bankruptcy, call the Chris Wesner Law Office, LLC for an initial consultation. The post Qualified Guidance From a Troy, Ohio Bankruptcy Attorney Regarding Chapter 7 appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.
Our law firm specializes in representing taxi medallion owners whose medallions are “underwater” (meaning that the loan secured and collateralized by the medallion is greater than the value of the medallion) in workouts with banks and creditors and in bankruptcy filings. We have noticed a trend recently where many medallion owners who own underwater taxi medallions have transferred their house or primary residence to a trust for no money or other consideration for the transfer. There appear to be two reasons for these transfers or conveyances: (1) estate planning (where the owner of the house wants future appreciation of the property to benefit a family member or third party); or (2) the property owner (who also owns the underwater medallion) believes that by conveying the house to a trust, he or she is putting the house outside of the reach of the bank or creditor, who will not be able to foreclose on the house if there is a default on the medallion loan and litigation.In our experience, after meeting with and speaking to many medallion owner clients, we have determined that most of these transfers are not done for estate planning purposes, but to put the family house outside of the reach of the bank or other creditors (the second reason). A couple of observations need to be made with respect to the transfer of a house to a trust from a debtor/creditor and/or bankruptcy perspective. If an individual borrows money from a bank, and their liabilities (monies owed to third parties) exceed their assets (property which they own), which is generally the fact pattern for an individual who wants an underwater taxi medallion, the transfer of the family house to a trust for no consideration (money or property) is a fraudulent conveyance. The statute of limitations (or look back period) is six years under the New York State Civil Practice Law and Rules and two years under the Bankruptcy Code. In a fraudulent conveyance action, the bank or other creditor can commence an action in New York State courts to reverse the conveyance of the family house from the trust back to the individual, and there are many reported cases where creditors have commenced these actions and prevailed (seeUnited States v. Evseroff). Accordingly, a homeowner who makes this type of the transfer may have incurred legal fees and paid real estate transfer taxes and fees to accomplish nothing from a workout or bankruptcy perspective!In fact, besides accomplishing nothing and incurring legal fees and real estate transfer taxes and fees, the medallion owner/homeowner may actually end up in a worse position than the medallion owner that did not make the transfer, for two reasons: (1) if the trust owns a house and not an individual (who owns the underwater medallion), then the individual cannot claim the New York State homestead exemption which is currently $165,550 per spouse ($331,100 for a married couple) in the New York metropolitan area; and (2) a creditor may object to the discharge of their debt because of the fraudulent conveyance of the house to the trust (see Husky Int’l Elecs., Inc. v. Ritz).The New York State homestead exemption provides protection to New York State residents, to wit the first $165,550 in equity in a primary residence, after the payment or satisfaction of a consensual mortgage, is property of or belongs to the homeowner and is not subject to the reach of a creditor or a bank. Additionally, the Bankruptcy Code provides that if a debtor made a fraudulent conveyance transfer prior to the date of the bankruptcy filing, this may be grounds to dismiss their bankruptcy case or deny them a discharge of certain debts.While there are techniques and approaches to undo or mitigate the damage done by these transfers or conveyances, it is better to not do them in the first place. We have however represented many individuals in mitigating the effects of these types of transfers.Prior to engaging in a workout with a bank or creditor, an individual or a debtor should and can engage in “asset protection planning” under New York State and federal bankruptcy law, but fraudulently conveying the family house to a trust to put the house outside of the reach of a creditor or a bank, does not work and is not valid asset protection planning.Our experience has shown that nervous or stressed out homeowners who own underwater taxi medallions may be doing themselves more harm than good by hastily conveying their house or other valuable assets to trusts or third parties for no consideration. We would advise medallion owners to consult with competent, experienced attorneys or lawyers before engaging in such actions. In fact, engaging in correct and meaningful asset protection planning can often times result in a successful workout with a bank or a successful discharge of debt in a bankruptcy filing.
Written by Daniel Hart, former MAZURKRAEMER paralegal According to a working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research, 15.7% of NFL players have filed for bankruptcy within twelve years of retiring. (16% of retired NFL players go bankruptcy, Fortune.com). A Sports Illustrated article reports that 78% of NFL players and 60% of NBA players face serious financial hardships after retirement. So why do so many athletes wind up bankrupt? We can begin by looking at the nature of how athletes earn their money. Athletes typically hit their earnings peak within a few years of finishing school. Across the three major American sports (MLB, NBA, NFL), the average career length is about 4.6 years. Thus, the average athlete’s career is over at a young age, and the typical player is only at their peak earnings for an extremely short period. Most never earn at the same level again. In contrast, the typical American reaches their earnings peak usually decades after finishing school and has accumulated a lifetime of knowledge about how to handle finances by that point. Some athletes may never think about an alternative career path for after retirement. Without formulating a “retirement plan” or proper budget, young athletes blow through their money. Many athletes trust the wrong financial advisor. When you earn as much as athletes, you become a natural target for smooth talking con-men in a nice suit. When you do not have a business/finance background, it can be easy to get conned into investing in what seems like a grand plan that will return huge profits. Stepping into an athlete’s mindset is important to understand why they would trust these people. First, an athlete is conditioned to listen to people with superior knowledge, like coaches and professionals who seem like savvy investors. Second, an athlete’s mind-set is focused on big rewards (think: championships) with almost anything less as a failure. Almost subconsciously, their goal is to hit a “home-run”(pun intended) with an investment. Therefore, they may trust the wrong people and invest in seemingly glamorous, but unsound investments which, in the end, result in financial ruin. As an example, Vince Young earned around $26 million in six seasons playing professional football. Young trusted the wrong financial planner who reportedly misappropriated $5.5 million of his money. Because of this and poor spending habits, Young was forced to file bankruptcy. Many athletes are attracted to the flashy investments. Whether it’s a new technology or restaurant with their name on it, many will invest in ideas that do not have great long-term business models. Look at local Pittsburgh kid, Dan Marino. Marino earned millions as a NFL quarterback and studio analyst during the CBS pre-game show, “The NFL Today”. However, he lost millions by investing in over 1.5 million shares in a company called, Digital Domain. Digital Domain is widely known for producing the hologram of Tupac Shakur at the Coachella Music and Art Festival. Digital Domain went bankrupt shortly after, and Marino was out nearly $14 million. Remember Curt Schilling. He saw a future in video games and spent $50 million in creating his own company, 38 Studios. Fast forward a couple years. 38 Studios filed bankruptcy, and Schilling is out his $50 million investment. An athlete’s personality traits and world view are almost unique. On the field, a pro is aggressive, demonstrates raw emotion, and uses his inhibitions. While these traits can make a winning athlete, they can make a poor businessman. Also, athletes must have a focus on today or the very near future. Just think about how a football player always talks about the next game and not the game five weeks from now. In financial planning and investing, it is typically better to have a long-term approach. What are your personality traits? What is your financial lense through which you view the money? French economist, Ruby Henry, describes the nature of athletes and how that affects their approach to financial situations. His example is that of a three-point shooter in basketball. That player must have a massive amount of confidence to continue to take that long-range, low percentage shot every game. Applying that same confidence to a financial investment often does not work and can leads to financial ruin. Former basketball star Antoine Walker earned over $100 million during his career. He filed for bankruptcy in 2010. As a basketball player, Walker had an insane level of confidence in his game, and, naturally, he applied this personality trait to his investments in multiple business ventures. However, business investments are not the same as professional sports. By taking such a confidence approach to business without having the knowledge base in finance/investing or proper advisors, financial disaster happened. Many athletes want, and are expected to live, a glamorous, exciting lifestyle. Being in the limelight on the field means nightclubs, mansions, sports cars, and parties. This harms them financially in two ways. First, all of these items cost of lot of money. Not only do many athletes spend exorbitant amounts on their cars and houses, but many feel the need to give back to the people that helped them get where they are now. This means buying their family a house, purchasing their childhood friend a BMW, and investing in their uncle’s not-so-solid business plan to become a music producer. Without having a proper budget, this is a simple way to blow through a million dollars. Second, sound financial planning for your future usually involves NOT making the flashy choice. Let’s face it, telling your friends that you just invested in a 25 year IRA with 8% yearly return on investment doesn’t exactly sound sexy. However, when you aren’t broke five years later, you will know you made the right choice. How can I take the examples of these athletes’ financial failures and apply them to my life? Some may think that this does not apply to me as I do not live such an extravagant lifestyle. However, many Americans find themselves in a similar situation as they face substantial debt, usually in the form of student loans. First, create a budget and stick to it. Avoid impulsive purchases. Only sparingly purchase the luxury item (read: new pair of shoes, not new car). Second, consult a proper financial advisor, preferably one who has references or works at a trusted investment company, and perform your due diligence before making large investments. Finally, you need to plan for the long-term. It’s not all about getting everything you want now. By investing or saving money now, you will have plenty for down the road. By following these simple steps, you can avoid the fate of a staggering amount of professional athletes.
There are many ways to defend a client against OVI (operating a vehicle while intoxicated). In other states, this is simply known as DUI. When we look at a case, there are ways to argue that the law enforcement agency’s representatives did not follow the proper procedures before arresting you for OVI. Some possibilities are as follows and could become part of your defense: You were profiled and you shouldn’t have been pulled over because you were operating safely and there were no obvious signs that your vehicle was not roadworthy and safe. You were going through a construction traffic pattern and the cops were just looking for people to pull over. You were coerced into taking a blood alcohol test (whether it was a breathalyzer device or a blood test) because you were afraid of going to jail. Officers shouldn’t use fear or coercion to get drivers to admit that they are driving while intoxicated or to undergo alcohol testing. At the Chris Wesner Law Office, we have encountered many other reasons why people have been unfairly targeted for OVI and subsequently arrested. This causes unnecessary stress on them and their families. It often seems that Ohio law enforcement officers have quotas, which means that they must write so many citations (including drunk driving charges) per shift. This is unfortunate and a potential way that law enforcement officers can harm society instead of helping them. We’ve even seen cases where a police officer or deputy has parked near a popular restaurant or bar and followed drivers home once they have left the establishment, which amounts to entrapment. While we support Ohio law enforcement officers who perform decent investigations, we also aggressively defend potential offenders who have been singled out and charged with OVI. We are here to help you present an effective defense on your day in court, to minimize fines and jail time, and to get your life back on track. For details, please contact us today. The post Defending OVI and DUI in Ohio appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.
Provided below is sales data from the sale of 19 taxi medallions as reported by the TLC for December 2017. The foreclosure sales prices for the four medallion sales (two at $750,000, one at $400,000 and one at $210,000) may be inflated because banks “credit bid” at those foreclosure sales (they bid up to the amount of their loan balances); therefore, they may not accurately reflect the fair market value of a taxi medallion. Similarly, the estate sales for $160,000 and no consideration may be too low a value because these sales reflect a sale by the estate of a taxi medallion owner who died, and those “desperate sellers” are selling for tax purposes or to quickly dispose of a depreciating asset. Factoring out the foreclosure and estate sales, the fair market value of a medallion based on December sales data appears to be $185,000-$200,000. Medallion owners with “underwater” medallions (where the loan balance exceeds the value of the medallion) should contact Jim Shenwick to discuss their options under the law. Price Type of Sale Number of Medallions $210,000 1 $210,000 Foreclosure 1 $800,000 3 $750,000 Foreclosure 2 $400,000 Foreclosure 1 $313,958.06 50% 1 $225,000 1 $200,000 1 $180,000 1 $180,000 1 $160,000 Estate 1 $158,000 1 $155,000 1 $0 Estate 1 $0 Estate 1 $0 Individual to LLC 1
A bankruptcy court in Illinois denied the chapter 13 trustee's request to dismiss a case for exceeding the §109(e) debt limit, finding that when student loan debt caused the excess, then the case should proceed in chapter 13. IN RE: CHRISTOPHER V. PRATOLA, Debtor., No. 17 B 11668, 2017 WL 6605264 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. Dec. 27, 2017). The debtor had incurred $568,671 in student loan debt in obtaining his undergraduate degree and graduate degree in cinema and television production. He had been paying $268/month the federal student loans on an income based repayment plan (IBR) requiring payments of 10% of his discretionary income since 2014, and the balance of the debt would be forgiven after 25 years of payments with no defaults. His payment under a standard 10 year repayment plan would be $3,655.75. Debtor is employed as a 'genius' at Apple making approximately $44,000/year. He has modest assets and lives on a tight budget. His schedules show $22,552 of credit card debt. The trustee sought to dismiss solely based on the debtor being over the debt limit of §109(e), which sets an debt limit of $394,725 of non-contingent, liquidated unsecured debts. The request was filed under §1307(c). § 1307(c) provides, in pertinent part, that “on request of a party in interest ... after notice and a hearing, the court may convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 of this title, or may dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause ....” The Court initially found that the IBR student loan was non-contingent. The fact that a portion of the debt may be forgiven in the future does not make the debt contingent. If the event giving rise to liability has already occurred, then the debt is noncontingent. In re McGovern, 122 B.R. 712, 716 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1989). The Court then examined whether 'cause' existed for dismissal under §1307(c). Cause is required for a dismissal or conversion under this section. In re Nelson, 343 B.R. 671, 675 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2006). While exceeding the debt limit is not included in the list of grounds to dismiss or convert, such list is not exclusive, and a number of court's have found this to be cause for such relief. However, it is not an absolute ground for dismissal or conversion. See United States v. Edmonston, 99 B.R. 995, 996 (E.D. Cal. 1989) (refusing to dismiss or convert case for ineligibility when the creditor moved to dismiss the case post-confirmation). The debt limits were initially included in enactment of chapter 13 in 1978, and adjusted in 1994 and 1998, with 3 year automatic adjustments thereafter. Congress created the debt limits to avoid having large business owners avoid the additional protections to creditors provided for in chapter 11. The Report of the Committee on the Judiciary (the “Report”) relating to the bill that eventually became the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 explains that the debt limits are aimed specifically at large businesses:The bill places dollar limitations on the amount of debts of the proprietor who may use chapter 13, in order to prevent sole proprietors with large businesses from abusing creditors by avoiding chapter 11. The limits create an irrebuttable presumption that chapter 13 is inappropriate for businesses with more than $100,000 in unsecured debt or more than $500,000 in secured debt.H.R. Doc. No. 93-137, at 118-119 (1977). Individuals with large amounts of student loan debts are not the types of debtors intended to be excluded by the debt limits in chapter 13. Nor is there an advantage to student loan creditors of a debtor filing under chapter 11. Many courts allow cure and maintain treatment of student loans in chapter 13. Also, student loan debts are nondischargeable regardless of plan treatment. Finally, upon emerging from chapter 13 debtors are more able to maintain payments on the student loans. Further, the debt limits fail to account for the increasing portion of student loan debt held by individuals. As educational debt has become increasingly difficult to discharge and chapter 13 debtors have been permitted to classify it separately in their plans, educational costs and debts have skyrocketed.Since 1978, the unsecured debt limit has increased at a rate of 7.6% per year on average. From 1978 to 2015, the cost of obtaining a post-secondary education increased at a rate of 20.7% per year on average. Digest of Educ. Statistics, Nat'l Ctr. for Educ. Statistics, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest. And in just the last ten years, the total amount of public educational debt has increased at a rate of 16.5% per year on average. Portfolio Summary, Fed. Student Aid, https://studentaid.ed.gov. Based on the statutory language, case law, and legislative history, as well as the practical realities of the case, the Court held that there is no cause for dismissal of the case. Dismissal would not advance the Congressional intent in creating the debt limits, and would hinder the intent of allowing a fresh start to honest but unfortunate debtors. Nor would dismissal advance the best interest of the creditors or the estate. If the case were converted to chapter 7 unsecured creditors would likely receive no dividend, and if converted to chapter 11 the fees and costs would be too cumbersome for a case such as his. Continuing in chapter 13 would be in the best interest of the creditors and the estate.Michael Barnett www.hillsboroughbankruptcy.com
Settle Debt and Regain Financial Freedom with an Attorney Facing debt head on with no concrete plan to pay it back is stressful and discouraging for most individuals. Unfortunately, many people have been in this position longer than necessary because they attempted to deal with their creditors on their own. However, hiring an attorney is beneficial because attorney’s will help you get your credit back on track and recover your credit score with their guidance. When should you hire an attorney for your debt? Regardless of how long you’ve been in debt, a debt attorney can help you find financial freedom. Essentially, it’s time to hire an attorney when your debt becomes overwhelming, and debt collectors are constantly calling, emailing, sending letters, or threats are being made to take legal action. Benefits of hiring an attorney Ultimately, an attorney can educate you on how to stop creditors from constantly contacting you regarding your debt. One situation that is common is for creditors to sue their debtors. For this reason, it would be a good idea for you to feel secure with an experienced attorney to represent you in court. An attorney is also beneficial if you have a counterclaim against a creditor. For example, if the creditor violates a procedure, such as recording a call without your knowledge. Having an overwhelming amount of debt can be scary, but it is certainly not the end. Attorney’s specialize in helping individuals by ensuring they get the right treatment and experience a smooth process. Investing in an attorney is perfect if your debt is too overwhelming and you want to regain financial freedom as seamlessly as possible. Chris Wesner Law Office, LLC is dedicated to helping individuals and advocating on other’s behalf. We are here to provide you the support you want and the relief you need. The post Settle Debt and Regain Financial Freedom appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.
Government-backed student loan debt almost always survives a bankruptcy discharge. Unless you are severely, permanently disabled and unable to work, your loans will likely still be there long after the court grants your discharge. So, is there any benefit to filing for bankruptcy if your school loans are overwhelming? A Chapter 13 Plan Crushed by debt Dayton, Ohio Bankruptcy Attorney Chris Wesner explains that a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, can reduce the loan payments for the three to five years the debtor’s plan is in place. Student loan debt is no exception. At the beginning of a Chapter 13, the debtor agrees to pay a certain percentage of all “unsecured” debts, such as credit cards or medical bills. (Secured debts – home mortgages or car loans – will be paid in full unless other arrangements are made.) The debtor pays into the plan, and the bankruptcy trustee then distributes money to these unsecured creditors. When the plan ends, the court discharges, or cancels, whatever balance remains. Student loan treatment The debtor includes student loans in his plan, and they are paid at the same percentage as unsecured debts. Likewise, the trustee sends the scheduled payment to the student loan holder. However, when the debtor’s plan ends, the student loans are not discharged. The debtor’s loan payments will resume. Benefit While it is true that the loans will not be discharged, the borrower should be in a better position to pay if all the other unsecured debt is gone. Each debtor with student loans will have different financial circumstances. It is important to consider the ratio of other debt to the amount of school loans. Loans made privately, directly through a bank, may be dischargeable. An experienced Dayton, Ohio bankruptcy attorney can examine your situation and develop solutions specific to your personal story. Please, contact us for an appointment. The post Dayton, Ohio Bankruptcy Attorney can review your student loan debt before a Chapter 13 filing appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.
By Winnie HuThe sputtering traffic in Manhattan has long been blamed on cars and deliverytrucks pouring onto the streets from the rest of the city and beyond.Since at least the 1970s, New York City officials have proposed various tollsystems to deter drivers from coming over bridges or piling into the busiestneighborhoods.But today, the traffic landscape in the city has undergone a remarkable shift —the problem is not just the congestion coming in, but the congestion that is alreadyhere. An explosion of ride-hailing app services has transformed the way that peopleget around the city and is choking the streets. Midtown traffic crawls at an average of4.7 miles per hour from 6.5 miles per hour five years ago.“You’ll see an entire row of Lyft, Uber and Juno drivers on the streets waiting topick people up,” said Chanse Gierbolini, 27, a baker in Lower Manhattan. “It seemslike everybody’s driving the same black sedan — they’re everywhere.”About 103,000 for-hire vehicles operate in the city, more than double theroughly 47,000 in 2013, according to the Taxi and Limousine Commission. Of those,68,000 are affiliated with ride-hailing app companies, including 65,000 with Uber.alone,though they may also provide rides for others. In contrast, yellow taxis are capped bycity law at just under 13,600.Now a new report finds that ride-hailing cars are often driving on the city’s busieststreets with no passengers — in effect, creating congestion without any benefits. Thereport by Bruce Schaller, a former city transportation official, found that more than athird of ride-hailing cars and yellow taxis are empty at any given time duringweekdays in Manhattan’s main business district.The ride-hailing cars average 11 minutes of unoccupied time — compared witheight minutes for yellow taxis — in between dropping off one passenger and pickingup another, according to the report.The ride-hailing services have drawn scrutiny as Gov. Andrew M. Cuomoformulates a congestion pricing plan that would not only reduce traffic, but also raisemoney to modernize the city’s subways. A state task force, called Fix NYC, is lookingat measures including a new per-ride fee on all for-hire vehicles in Manhattan, whichwould be paid by passengers, according to those familiar with the discussions. Mr.Cuomo is expected to announce a congestion pricing plan, which must be approvedby the State Legislature, as soon as January.“The governor has been clear we need to reduce gridlock, cut emissions andfund mass transit,’’ said Peter Ajemian, a spokesman for Mr. Cuomo, “which is whyhe empaneled Fix NYC to explore all options.”Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg was the last to try a congestion pricing plan, in 2008.His plan, which would have exacted an $8 fee for entering Midtown and LowerManhattan, died in the State Assembly.Across the nation, a handful of cities have imposed per-ride fees. Seattle, whichbegan regulating ride-hailing services in 2014, charges two fees totaling 24 cents perride to cover the costs of regulating and licensing operators and to supportwheelchair-accessible cars. Portland, Ore., began charging passengers a fee of 50cents per ride in 2016 to pay for safety inspections of cars and other regulatory costs.In Chicago, where Mayor Rahm Emanuel contends the ride-hailing services havecost his city millions in lost taxes and fees, the city introduced a 20-cent-per ridefee in 2014 and raised that to 50 cents the following year. The fee will rise to 65cents next year, and then to 70 cents in 2019 — with the additional increasesdedicated solely to modernizing the transit system, city officials said.New York City is considering a new fee on for-hire vehicles at a time when thestate-controlled Metropolitan Transportation Authority is in dire need of money tooverhaul the city’s decrepit subway system. Advocates say it would be easier to pushthrough the State Legislature than tolls on the East River bridges and already has aprecedent: a 50-cent surcharge on cab rides that goes to the transportationauthority. The ride-hailing services are not subject to that surcharge, but collect stateand local sales taxes on each ride.Mayor Bill de Blasio has criticized Uber’s rapid expansion for exacerbatingtraffic, but his administration backed down from a proposed cap on Uber cars in2015. The mayor, who opposes congestion pricing, has announced his own plan toreduce traffic, including banning some truck deliveries and stepping up enforcementof traffic rules.In the meantime, there is no escape from gridlocked streets. Jennifer Brown, 46,an architect, was recently trapped in a cab on Fifth Avenue near 72nd Street en routeto an appointment. After going two blocks in 20 minutes, she finally jumped out towalk to a subway station. “I was late, so it was anxiety inducing,” she said.Alexis Licairac, 47, a law firm clerk in Lower Manhattan, said it takes him abouttwo hours to get to work by bus from his home in the Bronx. “It’s absolutelyhorrible,” he said. “When I see how bad the congestion is in the city, I think if there’sa disaster, we’d never get out.”Sam Schwartz, a former city traffic commissioner who is on the state task force,said that a new ride fee could compel some passengers to seek cheaper alternatives,including subways and buses. He said that growing car congestion has hurt the cityeconomy at all levels, from making it harder to get to work to increasing deliverycosts for stores and restaurants.Alix Anfang, an Uber spokeswoman, said simply adding a fee would not addressan already unfair fee system in which Uber riders pay more in sales tax than taxiriders pay with the 50-cent M.T.A. fee. The minimum fare for an individual Uberride in New York City is $8, which amounts to a sales tax of 71 cents. She said thesystem is especially a burden on riders outside Manhattan, who have fewer subwayand bus options.This week, Uber started a campaign calling for a comprehensive approach tocongestion pricing, which could include a per-ride fee in Manhattan among othermeasures.“The existing ride-hailing tax unfairly burdens outer borough New Yorkers who payfar more in taxes per trip than Manhattan taxi riders,” Ms. Anfang said, “which iswhy Uber believes a new transit tax system should fully fund mass transit by settingfees based on how crowded the roads are, not the type of vehicle people are travelingin.”Campbell Matthews, a Lyft spokeswoman, said the company has focused onincreasing occupancy in cars on the road and reducing individual car ownership.“We are supportive of holistic efforts to address congestion in New York to ensurethat all transit options available to New Yorkers are convenient and affordable,” shesaid.Drivers for ride-hailing services and cabs said they would oppose a new ride fee,arguing that they, too, are hurt by congestion and that such a fee would unfairlysingle them out when there were other causes, such as construction, garbage pickupsand truck deliveries.Mohammed Zzaman, who drives for Uber, Lyft and Juno, said he made fewerpickups and less money during his “hell month” in December, when holiday crowdsdescend on the city and it takes twice as long to cross Midtown.George Vountouvas, 60, an Uber driver, said he started at 4:30 a.m. because“there’s no congestion, no traffic at that time.”Nino Hervias, a taxi owner and spokesman for the Taxi Medallion Owner DriverAssociation, said the hefty prices for taxi medallions should already include access toManhattan streets, though he supported a new fee for ride-hailing cars.While Uber, Lyft and Via have expanded their services outside Manhattan, Mr.Schaller found that for-hire vehicles continued to crowd into Manhattan’s mainbusiness district. There were an average of 10,500 yellow cabs and vehicles workingfor ride-hailing apps from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., or more than double the 5,100 vehicles in2013. “It’s very easy to get a ride when you want one, but once you get in the car,you’re stuck in traffic,” he said.Mr. Schaller has called for reducing the unoccupied time for ride-hailing carsand yellow taxis in addition to other efforts to reduce congestion, such as a new ridefee or toll system. He noted that Uber already uses technology at the airports to“rematch” cars dropping off passengers with new pickups to reduce congestion — apractice that could be expanded to city streets.Many riders said something had to be done about congestion, but were wary ofanother fee. “We already pay taxes — what more do they want from us?” said EvelynJimenez, 38, a dental assistant who already spends at least $15 a day on Uber.But Mr. Gierbolini, the baker, said that he would be willing to pay a little moresince he still depends on the subway to get to work. He spends $25 a week on Lyft,but only when he is not under pressure to be someplace on time.“There’s almost no reliable way to get anywhere on time other than walking,” hesaid.Copyright 2017 The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.
Crushed by debt Our Troy, Ohio bankruptcy attorney, with offices in Troy, Springfield, Xenia, Piqua, and Beaver Creek, helps clients who are in default on their student loans. We will try to help you find an affordable positive solution to all your financial problems. The United States Department of Education (DOE) offers four income-based repayment plans for resolution of student loan debt with loan forgiveness for government service. Chris Wesner, LLC., a member of five Ohio bar associations and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, has ten years of experience helping clients with Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcies. Income-Based Repayment Plans Professional loan servicers, working with the DOE, are available free of charge to help you apply for an income-based repayment plan. Four income-driven loan forgiveness programs require you to pay 10% to 20% of your “discretionary” income for a period of ten to twenty years. Your monthly payments increase and decrease with your earnings and the size of your family based on an annual certification process. Your remaining student loan balance is forgiven at the end of your repayment period when you complete your income-based repayment plan. Public Service Loan Forgiveness You may be eligible for public service student loan forgiveness if you work for a nonprofit or a government organization. The public service loan forgiveness program discharges your remaining student loan debt balance when you have successfully completed a 120-month repayment program. Contact us for help with student loan repayment, foreclosure, repossession, or credit card debt. Our bankruptcy law firm will take the time to understand your unique financial situation. Your initial consultation is free. The post Troy, Ohio Bankruptcy Attorney Reduces Student Loan Defaults appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.