.jpg)
Service to mortgage lienholders in Motions to Avoid
I had this happen recently as well. Even though I served it on the right person (the CEO), it was not at the right address and not certified. I re-served it properly, waited the time, filed proof of receipt with the court along with the notice of nonopposition, and got the Order avoiding the lien.
It's time consuming, but worth it. Good luck.
Laura E. YoungLaw Offices of Laura E. Young17061 Newland StreetHuntington Beach CA 92647Ph: 714-594-3869lyounglaw@yahoo.com
roups.com>
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 6:14 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Service to mortgage lienholders in Motions to Avoid Judicial Lien
tified mail at FDIC addresses.
Sent from my Stella Havkin's IPhone
On Jun 8, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions.ually used the lenders address used in Schedule D.
Court cited
"U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its addressregistered with the FDIC and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to all lienholders is required byLBR 4003-2(c)(2)"
I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had sent the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..
This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right? Or can I file a Motion to Reconsider?
I could use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. held both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.
Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.
Thanks
Craig
Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.Attorney at LawPO Box 25857Santa Ana, CA 92799(949) 689-9709(714) 835-5763faxLegallycraig@gmail.com
NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not acceptnotice forEx ParteApplications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours.
IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528:We are a debt relief agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Reply-To: "MARIA W. TAM"
X-Original-Return-Path: "MARIA W. TAM"
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: groups-system
Also, call the clerk's office and ask them to keep the case open for 30
more days so that you can refile the case. I had a case in LA, right after
my motion to avoid lien was filed and denied without prejudice (denied due
to improper service, I have to refile and reserve), the LA clerk's office
closed the case. Real pain in the xxx. I have to file a motion to reopen
before I can file the motion to avoid lien again. Later on, in another
case, I called and screamed and the clerk's office actually kept it open 30
days for me to file the motion to avoid lien again.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Stella Havkin havkinlaw@earthlink.net
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> This is standard everywhere. The banks must be served by certified mail
> at FDIC addresses.
>
> Sent from my Stella Havkin's IPhone
>
> On Jun 8, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
>
> I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens
> in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage
> lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified
> mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC
> address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd
> mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have
> never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the
> lenders address used in Schedule D.
>
> Court cited
>
> "U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address registered with the FDIC
> and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
> Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to
> all lienholders is required by LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"
>
> I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had sent
> the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..
>
> This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right? Or can I file a
> Motion to Reconsider?
>
> I could use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st
> time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held
> both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS
> and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.
>
> Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.
>
> Thanks
>
> Craig
>
>
> Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.
> Attorney at Law
> PO Box 25857
> Santa Ana, CA 92799
> (949) 689-9709
> (714) 835-5763 fax
> Legallycraig@gmail.com
>
> NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
> Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
> California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
> business hours.
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief
> agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
> confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
> you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
> store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
> delete this e-mail from your system.
>
>
>
Also, call the clerk's office and ask them to keep the case open for 30 more days so that you can refile the case. I had a case in LA, right after my motion to avoid lien was filed and denied without prejudice (denied due to improper service, I have to refile and reserve), the LA clerk's office closed the case. Real pain in the xxx. I have to file a motion to reopen before I can file the motion to avoid lien again. Later on, in another case, I called and screamed and the clerk's office actually kept it open 30 days for me to file the motion to avoid lien again.On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Stella Havkin havkinlaw@earthlink.net [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
This is standard everywhere. The banks must be served by certified mail at FDIC addresses. Sent from my Stella Havkin's IPhoneOn Jun 8, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the lenders address used in Schedule D.Court cited"U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address
registered with the FDIC and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to all lienholders is required by
LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had sent the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right?use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.ThanksCraig
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
X-Original-Return-Path: "MARIA W. TAM"
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: groups-system
Also, call the clerk's office and ask them to keep the case open for 30
more days so that you can refile the case. I had a case in LA, right after
my motion to avoid lien was filed and denied without prejudice (denied due
to improper service, I have to refile and reserve), the LA clerk's office
closed the case. Real pain in the xxx. I have to file a motion to reopen
before I can file the motion to avoid lien again. Later on, in another
case, I called and screamed and the clerk's office actually kept it open 30
days for me to file the motion to avoid lien again.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Stella Havkin havkinlaw@earthlink.net
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> This is standard everywhere. The banks must be served by certified mail
> at FDIC addresses.
>
> Sent from my Stella Havkin's IPhone
>
> On Jun 8, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
>
> I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens
> in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage
> lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified
> mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC
> address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd
> mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have
> never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the
> lenders address used in Schedule D.
>
> Court cited
>
> "U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address registered with the FDIC
> and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
> Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to
> all lienholders is required by LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"
>
> I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had sent
> the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..
>
> This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right? Or can I file a
> Motion to Reconsider?
>
> I could use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st
> time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held
> both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS
> and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.
>
> Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.
>
> Thanks
>
> Craig
>
>
> Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.
> Attorney at Law
> PO Box 25857
> Santa Ana, CA 92799
> (949) 689-9709
> (714) 835-5763 fax
> Legallycraig@gmail.com
>
> NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
> Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
> California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
> business hours.
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief
> agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
> confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
> you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
> store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
> delete this e-mail from your system.
>
>
>
Also, call the clerk's office and ask them to keep the case open for 30 more days so that you can refile the case. I had a case in LA, right after my motion to avoid lien was filed and denied without prejudice (denied due to improper service, I have to refile and reserve), the LA clerk's office closed the case. Real pain in the xxx. I have to file a motion to reopen before I can file the motion to avoid lien again. Later on, in another case, I called and screamed and the clerk's office actually kept it open 30 days for me to file the motion to avoid lien again.On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Stella Havkin havkinlaw@earthlink.net [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
This is standard everywhere. The banks must be served by certified mail at FDIC addresses. Sent from my Stella Havkin's IPhoneOn Jun 8, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the lenders address used in Schedule D.Court cited"U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address
registered with the FDIC and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to all lienholders is required by
LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had sent the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right?use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.ThanksCraig
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Reply-To: Craig J Beauchamp
X-Original-Return-Path: Craig J Beauchamp
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: groups-system
So we are to read
LBR 4003.2
(c) Service.
(1) The motion, notice, and supporting documents must be served on the
holder of the lien to be avoided in the same manner as a summons and
complaint under FRBP 7004.
(2) The motion, notice, and supporting documents also must be served on any
other holder of a lien or encumbrance against the subject property.
as meaning that FRBP 7004 applies to both paragraphs(1) and (2)?.
I did not read that rule as that since the FRBP 7004 was not mentioned in
paragraph (2) and therefore I have not used FRBP for lender's whose
interest was not affect and just used the address either in a POC or on
Schedule D.
Since 2005, this is the first time I've been denied on failure to use FRBP
7004 to ALL lienholders whether their interest is affected or not.
But from now on, I'll take the extra step to use the FDIC address. Thanks
Mike
Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.
Attorney at Law
PO Box 25857
Santa Ana, CA 92799
(949) 689-9709
(714) 835-5763 fax
Legallycraig@gmail.com
NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
business hours.
IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief agency.
We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system.
On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Michael Avanesian michael@avanesianlaw.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> FRBP 7004(h) applies to both AP and contested matters so the judge is
> correct.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> *Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
> Avanesian Law Firm
> 801 N. Brand Blvd., Suite #1130
> Glendale, CA 91203
> Tel: 818.276.2477 | Fax: 818.208.4550
>
> *Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
> legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
> use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
> copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
> to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
> imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
> for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
> transaction or matter addressed herein.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens
>> in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage
>> lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified
>> mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC
>> address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd
>> mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have
>> never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the
>> lenders address used in Schedule D.
>>
>> Court cited
>>
>> "U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address registered with the FDIC
>> and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
>> Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to
>> all lienholders is required by LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"
>>
>> I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had
>> sent the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..
>>
>> This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right? Or can I file a
>> Motion to Reconsider?
>>
>> I could use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st
>> time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held
>> both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS
>> and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.
>>
>> Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>> Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.
>> Attorney at Law
>> PO Box 25857
>> Santa Ana, CA 92799
>> (949) 689-9709
>> (714) 835-5763 fax
>> Legallycraig@gmail.com
>>
>> NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
>> Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
>> California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
>> business hours.
>>
>> IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief
>> agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
>> confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
>> you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
>> store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
>> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
>> delete this e-mail from your system.
>>
>>
>
>
So we are to readLBR 4003.2(c) Service.(1) The motion, notice, and supporting documents must be served on the holder of the
lien to be avoided in the same manner as a summons and complaint under
FRBP 7004.ments also must be served on any other
holder of a lien or encumbrance against the subject property.as meaning that FRBP 7004 applies to both paragraphs(1) and (2)?. I did not read that rule as that since the FRBP 7004 was not mentioned in paragraph (2) and therefore I have not used FRBP for lender's whose interest was not affect and just used the address either in a POC or on Schedule D. Since 2005, this is the first time I've been denied on failure to use FRBP 7004 to ALL lienholders whether their interest is affected or not.But from now on, I'll take the extra step to use the FDIC address. Thanks MikeCraig J. Beauchamp, Esq.Attorney at LawPO Box 25857Santa Ana, CA 92799(949) 689-9709(714) 835-5763faxLegallycraig@gmail.comNO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not acceptnotice forcomply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours.IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528:We are a debt relief agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your sys
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
X-Original-Return-Path: Craig J Beauchamp
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: groups-system
So we are to read
LBR 4003.2
(c) Service.
(1) The motion, notice, and supporting documents must be served on the
holder of the lien to be avoided in the same manner as a summons and
complaint under FRBP 7004.
(2) The motion, notice, and supporting documents also must be served on any
other holder of a lien or encumbrance against the subject property.
as meaning that FRBP 7004 applies to both paragraphs(1) and (2)?.
I did not read that rule as that since the FRBP 7004 was not mentioned in
paragraph (2) and therefore I have not used FRBP for lender's whose
interest was not affect and just used the address either in a POC or on
Schedule D.
Since 2005, this is the first time I've been denied on failure to use FRBP
7004 to ALL lienholders whether their interest is affected or not.
But from now on, I'll take the extra step to use the FDIC address. Thanks
Mike
Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.
Attorney at Law
PO Box 25857
Santa Ana, CA 92799
(949) 689-9709
(714) 835-5763 fax
Legallycraig@gmail.com
NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
business hours.
IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief agency.
We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system.
On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Michael Avanesian michael@avanesianlaw.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> FRBP 7004(h) applies to both AP and contested matters so the judge is
> correct.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> *Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
> Avanesian Law Firm
> 801 N. Brand Blvd., Suite #1130
> Glendale, CA 91203
> Tel: 818.276.2477 | Fax: 818.208.4550
>
> *Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
> legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
> use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
> copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
> to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
> imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
> for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
> transaction or matter addressed herein.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens
>> in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage
>> lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified
>> mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC
>> address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd
>> mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have
>> never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the
>> lenders address used in Schedule D.
>>
>> Court cited
>>
>> "U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address registered with the FDIC
>> and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
>> Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to
>> all lienholders is required by LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"
>>
>> I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had
>> sent the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..
>>
>> This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right? Or can I file a
>> Motion to Reconsider?
>>
>> I could use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st
>> time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held
>> both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS
>> and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.
>>
>> Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>> Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.
>> Attorney at Law
>> PO Box 25857
>> Santa Ana, CA 92799
>> (949) 689-9709
>> (714) 835-5763 fax
>> Legallycraig@gmail.com
>>
>> NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
>> Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
>> California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
>> business hours.
>>
>> IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief
>> agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
>> confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
>> you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
>> store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
>> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
>> delete this e-mail from your system.
>>
>>
>
>
So we are to readLBR 4003.2(c) Service.(1) The motion, notice, and supporting documents must be served on the holder of the
lien to be avoided in the same manner as a summons and complaint under
FRBP 7004.ments also must be served on any other
holder of a lien or encumbrance against the subject property.as meaning that FRBP 7004 applies to both paragraphs(1) and (2)?. I did not read that rule as that since the FRBP 7004 was not mentioned in paragraph (2) and therefore I have not used FRBP for lender's whose interest was not affect and just used the address either in a POC or on Schedule D. Since 2005, this is the first time I've been denied on failure to use FRBP 7004 to ALL lienholders whether their interest is affected or not.But from now on, I'll take the extra step to use the FDIC address. Thanks MikeCraig J. Beauchamp, Esq.Attorney at LawPO Box 25857Santa Ana, CA 92799(949) 689-9709(714) 835-5763faxLegallycraig@gmail.comNO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not acceptnotice forcomply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours.IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528:We are a debt relief agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your sys
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
FRBP 7004(h) applies to both AP and contested matters so the judge is
correct.
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
Avanesian Law Firm
801 N. Brand Blvd., Suite #1130
Glendale, CA 91203
Tel: 818.276.2477 | Fax: 818.208.4550
*Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
*IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens
> in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage
> lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified
> mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC
> address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd
> mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have
> never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the
> lenders address used in Schedule D.
>
> Court cited
>
> "U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address registered with the FDIC
> and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
> Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to
> all lienholders is required by LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"
>
> I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had sent
> the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..
>
> This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right? Or can I file a
> Motion to Reconsider?
>
> I could use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st
> time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held
> both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS
> and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.
>
> Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.
>
> Thanks
>
> Craig
>
>
> Craig J. Beauchamp, Esq.
> Attorney at Law
> PO Box 25857
> Santa Ana, CA 92799
> (949) 689-9709
> (714) 835-5763 fax
> Legallycraig@gmail.com
>
> NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept notice for *Ex
> Parte* Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
> California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
> business hours.
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE required by 11 U.S.C. 528: We are a debt relief
> agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
> confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
> you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
> store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
> delete this e-mail from your system.
>
>
>
FRBP 7004(h) applies to both AP and contested matters so the judge is correct.Sincerely,Michael Avanesian, Esq.Avanesian Law Firm801 N. Brand Blvd., Suite #1130Glendale, CA 91203Tel: 818.276.2477 | Fax:818.208.4550Confidentiality:This electronic transmission and its contents are legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Craig J Beauchamp legallycraig@gmail.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I have a Riverside judge who has denied my motion to avoid judicial liens in a Chapter 7 case because I did not serve the first and second mortgage lender according their FDIC address and sent certified. We sent certified mail address to the judgment lienholders to an officer at the FDIC address. But Judge stated as follows for service on the 1st and 2nd mortgage lenders whose interest is not at state in these motions. I have never serviced the mortgage lenders this way. I have usually used the lenders address used in Schedule D.Court cited"U.S. Bank, N.A. was not served at its address
registered with the FDIC and was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(h). Real Time Resolutions,
Inc. was not served in accordance with FRBP 7004(b)(3). Proper notice to all lienholders is required by
LBR 4003-2(c)(2)"I just got another judicial lien avoided by an LA judge today and had sent the mortgage lender notice to the address in Schedule D..This was not an adversary proceeding. Is judge right? Or can I file a Motion to Reconsider?I could use some help. I do not want to have to file a 3rd time. 1st time we thought the 2nd had been assumed by the 1st when Litton who held both mortgages went out of business. It took months and subpoenas to MERS and Ocwen to discover the status of the 2nd.Time is of the essence as I can't afford to have the case closed.ThanksCraig
The post was migrated from Yahoo.