Archive for the ‘type’ Category

What is a Redemption of Property in Chapter 7

Saturday, March 19th, 2011

If you are purchasing a vehicle and you file Chapter 7, your options are (1) surrender the vehicle, (2) reaffirm the existing loan, or (3) redeem the vehicle by paying the lender fair market value.  Redemption, which is described at Section 722 of the Bankruptcy Code used to be an uncommon choice.  More recently, however, several lenders have entered the market to finance Section 722 redemptions.  In this video, I discuss how redemptions work and how to know if a Motion for Redemption under Section 722 is a good idea.

Can You be Sued for Non-payment of your Mortgage if You Do Not Reaffirm?

Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010

I recently received an email from a blog reader asking about his obligations to his mortgage company when he does not reaffirm:

I have read your blog and you are very through so I write you with hopes that you might answer this question for me. I file Chapter 7  in 08, and did not reaffirm my loan. I am still living in the house and did make some payments. However, i have not for the last 8 months. It is my understanding that I must sign a document to reaffirm and that continuing payment in itself is not a reaffirmation…or?  Well it gets a little more complicated.  My house is valued at $410,000 and the bank has offered me a deal that is going to be hard to refuse. They have agreed to let me do a short re-fi in the amount of 180k.  If I agree to that is that in itself a reaffirmation?

Here is my response: in most cases, when you take out a mortgage loan, you are signing two different types of agreements.  The first type is a promissory note whereby you personally agree to make the payments.  The second type of obligation creates a property lien, meaning that you, as the owner of the property, pledges that property as collateral for the loan.

When you file a Chapter 7 and receive your discharge, your personal obligations are extinguished.  However, a Chapter 7 discharge does not eliminate the mortgage company's lien against your property.  If you "reaffirm" your mortgage, you are actually reaffirming the promissory note and your personal obligations to pay.

For years, many bankruptcy attorneys advised their clients to avoid signing reaffirmation agreements for mortgages, car loans or any other secured debt.  The reasoning – even without a personal "guarantee" lenders are protected by the property lien.  If the lender is willing to accept payments (the so-called "stay and pay" option), the now discharged debtor keeps his property, keeps making payment, but does not have personal liability on the note.

If the debtor misses payments, the lender would still have the right to foreclose or repossess based on the property lien.  The debtor would not have personal liability for any foreclosure or repossession deficiency because his personal liability was extinguished in the bankruptcy.

There is a downside to this "stay and pay" strategy.  First, the debtor does not get any credit report benefit for making payments.  Because the debtor's personal obligations have been extinguished, the lender no longer reports either a positive or a negative payment history.   A positive payment history from a mortgage company can be a good way to restore credit after bankruptcy, and if you do not reaffirm, you will not get this benefit.

Second, there is the "uncertainty factor" if you do not reaffirm.  Most mortgage or vehicle finance installment notes contain a default provision that includes bankruptcy as a default trigger.  In theory, at least, once your bankruptcy is closed (and the automatic stay of bankruptcy terminated), your lender could declare your loan in default and take action under State law to recover the collateral.  In my experience, lenders would much rather have monthly payments than your collateral but this risk does exist.

Finally, many of my readers have asked me if there is such a thing as "constructive reaffirmation" meaning that by making payments, are you in effect re-obligating yourself?  Are you creating a contractual obligation by your actions?

I think that the answer to this depends on State law but I would suspect that a mortgage or vehicle lender would have a hard time making this argument.  In many States (such as in Georgia) a financial obligation related to real estate must be written and they must have specific terms.  As a matter of general contract law, a contract usually will not be enforceable if its terms are not specified.   I would argue therefore that a debtor's actions of simply making payments and the lenders actions of accepting such payments should not be enough to create personal liability on the part of the debtor.  I would be interested to know if any of the attorneys who read this blog have a different opinion or if anyone is aware of any case law that says otherwise.

At a minimum, if a lender tries to make the argument that you have somehow re-obligated yourself personally by your act of making payments, I would insist that the lender provide you with case law or other support for its position, and you should consult with a lawyer before agreeing to any payment or taking any action (like signing a new, valid contract) that could create personal liability.

My reader states that his lender has proposed a refinance for $180,000.   He did not say, but I presume that his prior (discharged) mortgage was much higher than this and that his current payments under the "stay and pay" are based on this higher balance.  If he enters into a mortgage contract for $180,000, that contract will function like any other mortgage – and include both personal liability under a promissory note as well as a property lien.   It is not a reaffirmation because the bankruptcy is over – instead, the proposed $180,000 loan deal is equivalent to a new mortgage.  This proposed deal could result in lower payments plus positive credit history, but it will also create personal liability that currently does not exist.  I would certainly advise my reader to discuss his options with an attorney so that he will fully understand the implications of his decision.

How Can Filing Bankruptcy Impact My Children?

Tuesday, February 16th, 2010

It is commonly known that filing for bankruptcy can be a very trying and emotional time for those filing. But it is less common to hear about how a bankruptcy can impact the children of bankruptcy filers. If you have children or dependents and are considering bankruptcy, it is important that you understand the potential consequences bankruptcy can have on your children.

1) Unfortunately, if a debtor contributes money towards a child's college tuition or to a college fund, filing for bankruptcy could potentially prevent these contributions from occurring. When you file for bankruptcy, the court and creditors will attempt to limit the amount of your expenses and may prioritize their collection accounts above your child’s education. While bankruptcy courts will allow necessary expenses such as housing, utilities, and food, your child’s education may not be viewed as essential. If you find yourself in this situation, I strongly recommend that you consult with a bankruptcy lawyer to understand more about how your child’s education may be affected when filing for bankruptcy.

2) When you file for bankruptcy, the line can get blurred between your assets and your child's assets. For example, say you opened a bank account for your child but failed to take the adequate steps to set it up correctly to be protected from something like a bankruptcy. When it comes time to file bankruptcy, you may run the risk of the money in that account being considered your money and not your child’s. This type of problem can occur if the account is under just your name (and not your child’s) or if you have ever used it to pay your own bills. Your children’s assets can be better protected from bankruptcy if the accounts are opened under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (UGMA) or the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (UTMA). If your child’s assets are at risk of being affected by bankruptcy, I again recommend consulting a bankruptcy lawyer to help find the best means of fixing this problem.

3) Children are protected from bankruptcy whether or not an in-debt parent is behind on child support payments. Child support obligations are a top priority and are ineligible for bankruptcy debt discharge. If you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, child support payments become a top priority when assets are being liquidated. If you file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, child support payments will be arranged in the repayment plan. In either case, the hope is that ex-spouses find it easier to pay child support since the bankruptcy may be able to lessen many of their other debt burdens.