.jpg)
Objection to Mortgage claim when home has been
My feeling is there is no way they can amend if the house was surrendered
and they are moving towards foreclosure.
My problem right now is that until the relief from stay, they cannot file a
Notice of Default. Until they file that, the argument that they are
foreclosing is weaker.
And the hearing on the motion for relief from stay is the same day as
confirmation.
1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
Pasadena, CA 91106
(626) 507-8090
"Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
slate."
"Like the witness protection program!"
"Exactly."
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Dennis McGoldrick wrote:
>
>
> Gosh, what if you object and they amend their claim?
>
>
> Dennis McGoldrick
> 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B
> Torrance, CA 90503
>
> On May 12, 2010, at 5:05 PM, Amy Clark wrote:
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Chapter 13 plan -- debtor is surrendering his property. We spoke to
> prior servicer and were going to stipulate to relief from stay but
> loan has been transferred to WF.
>
> Wells Fargo promptly filed Mt for relief from stay.
>
> We are filing Non-opposition.
>
> WF then files claim for full amount of mortgage -- this is violation
> of one action rule PLUS kills the 100% plan (really, adding, $219,000
> in claims kills my plan. Odd, huh?)
>
> Anyone have a sample objection??
>
> Confirmation hearing in this already hard-fought BK is May 26 with VK.
>
> WTHeck do I do here?
>
> -- Amy Clark Kleinpeter
>
> 1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
> Pasadena, CA 91106
> (626) 507-8090
>
> "Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
> slate."
>
> "Like the witness protection program!"
>
> "Exactly."
>
>
>
>
My feeling is there is no way they can amend if the house was surrendered and they are moving towards foreclosure.My problem right now is that until the relief from stay, they cannot file a Notice of Default. Until they file that, the argument that they are foreclosing is weaker.
And the hearing on the motion for relief from stay is the same day as confirmation. -- Amy Clark Kleinpeter1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207Pasadena, CA 91106(626) 507-8090
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I'm not 100% sure either, Larry...although I will say if they do NOT and can
screw up the BK and then take their time about foreclosing, causing HOA fees
to be run up forever, this job really sucks.
Surely there has to be a way to object. I may try Pat Green's method...
1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
Pasadena, CA 91106
(626) 507-8090
"Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
slate."
"Like the witness protection program!"
"Exactly."
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 8:29 PM, wrote:
>
>
> Thinking out loud, doesn't Wells have to seek and get a judgment on the
> note to waive their security interest under the one action rule. Not sure if
> filing a POC is an election of remedies (or did I miss something in the fact
> pattern).
>
> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
> ------------------------------
> *Date: *Wed, 12 May 2010 20:17:18 -0700
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [cdcbaa] Objection to Mortgage claim when home has been
> surrendered
>
>
>
> Although if this idea worked that would really really rock. What are the
> honest chances of this working? Odds, anyone? -- Amy Clark Kleinpeter 1489
> E. Colorado Blvd. #207 Pasadena, CA 91106 (626) 507-8090 "Bankruptcy,
> Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean slate." "Like the
> witness protection program!" "Exactly." On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:47 PM,
> Patrick Green wrote: > > > Amy: > > > > Why do you need a 100% plan? > > > >
> What if you do not object, amend the plan and schedules and let it be >
> confirmed with WFB as an unsecured and then get declaratory relief stating >
> that WFB has chosen their remedy and thus lost their security. Let them get
> > .01% of the principal balance from the unsecured pool and the remainder >
> discharged at the end of the plan. Client gets house for pennies. > > > > If
> you have any questions or concerns, please contact me. > > > > Pat > > > >
> Patrick T. Green, Esq. > > Fitzgerald Green > > Attorneys at Law > > 1010 E.
> Union Street > > Suite 206 > > Pasadena, CA 91106 > > Tel: 626-449-8433 > >
> Fax: 626-449-0565 > > pat@fitzgreenlaw.com > > > > > > *From:*
> cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf > Of
> *Amy Clark > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 12, 2010 5:06 PM > *To:*
> cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Objection to Mortgage claim
> when home has been > surrendered > > > > > > Hello all, > > > Chapter 13
> plan -- debtor is surrendering his property. We spoke to > prior servicer
> and were going to stipulate to relief from stay but > loan has been
> transferred to WF. > > Wells Fargo promptly filed Mt for relief from stay. >
> > We are filing Non-opposition. > > WF then files claim for full amount of
> mortgage -- this is violation > of one action rule PLUS kills the 100% plan
> (really, adding, $219,000 > in claims kills my plan. Odd, huh?) > > Anyone
> have a sample objection?? > > Confirmation hearing in this already
> hard-fought BK is May 26 with VK. > > WTHeck do I do here? > > -- Amy Clark
> Kleinpeter > > 1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207 > Pasadena, CA 91106 > (626)
> 507-8090 > > "Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start,
> a clean > slate." > > "Like the witness protection program!" > > "Exactly."
> > > >
>
>
>
I'm not 100% sure either, Larry...although I will say if they do NOT and can screw up the BK and then take their time about foreclosing, causing HOA fees to be run up forever, this job really sucks.
Surely there has to be a way to object. I may try Pat Green's method...-- Amy Clark Kleinpeter1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207Pasadena, CA 91106(626) 507-8090"Bankru
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Although if this idea worked that would really really rock.
What are the honest chances of this working? Odds, anyone?
1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
Pasadena, CA 91106
(626) 507-8090
"Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
slate."
"Like the witness protection program!"
"Exactly."
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Patrick Green wrote:
>
>
> Amy:
>
>
>
> Why do you need a 100% plan?
>
>
>
> What if you do not object, amend the plan and schedules and let it be
> confirmed with WFB as an unsecured and then get declaratory relief stating
> that WFB has chosen their remedy and thus lost their security. Let them get
> .01% of the principal balance from the unsecured pool and the remainder
> discharged at the end of the plan. Client gets house for pennies.
>
>
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
>
>
>
> Pat
>
>
>
> Patrick T. Green, Esq.
>
> Fitzgerald & Green
>
> Attorneys at Law
>
> 1010 E. Union Street
>
> Suite 206
>
> Pasadena, CA 91106
>
> Tel: 626-449-8433
>
> Fax: 626-449-0565
>
> pat@fitzgreenlaw.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf
> Of *Amy Clark
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 12, 2010 5:06 PM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Objection to Mortgage claim when home has been
> surrendered
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
>
> Chapter 13 plan -- debtor is surrendering his property. We spoke to
> prior servicer and were going to stipulate to relief from stay but
> loan has been transferred to WF.
>
> Wells Fargo promptly filed Mt for relief from stay.
>
> We are filing Non-opposition.
>
> WF then files claim for full amount of mortgage -- this is violation
> of one action rule PLUS kills the 100% plan (really, adding, $219,000
> in claims kills my plan. Odd, huh?)
>
> Anyone have a sample objection??
>
> Confirmation hearing in this already hard-fought BK is May 26 with VK.
>
> WTHeck do I do here?
>
> -- Amy Clark Kleinpeter
>
> 1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
> Pasadena, CA 91106
> (626) 507-8090
>
> "Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
> slate."
>
> "Like the witness protection program!"
>
> "Exactly."
>
>
>
Although if this idea worked that would really really rock.What are the honest chances of this working? Odds, anyone?-- Amy Clark Kleinpeter1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
Pasadena, CA 91106(626) 507-8090"Bankruptcy, Michael, is >"Like the witness protection program!""Exactly."
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Patrick Green <pat@fitzgreenlaw.com> wrote:
Amy:
Why do you need a 100% plan?
What if you do not object, amend
the plan and schedules and let it be confirmed with WFB as an unsecured and
then get declaratory relief stating that WFB has chosen their remedy and thus
lost their security. Let them get .01% of the principal balance from the
unsecured pool and the remainder discharged at the end of the plan. Client gets
house for pennies.
If you have any questions or
concerns, please contact me.
Pat
Patrick T. Green, Esq.
Fitzgerald & Green
Attorneys at Law
1010 E. Union Street
Suite 206
Pasadena, CA 91106
Tel: 626-449-8433
Fax: 626-449-0565
pat@fitzgreenlaw.com
From:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Amy
Clark
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 5:06 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [cdcbaa] Objection to Mortgage claim when home has been
surrendered
Hello all,
Chapter 13 plan -- debtor is surrendering his property. We spoke to
prior servicer and were going to stipulate to relief from stay but
loan has been transferred to WF.
Wells Fargo promptly filed Mt for relief from stay.
We are filing Non-opposition.
WF then files claim for full amount of mortgage -- this is violation
of one action rule PLUS kills the 100% plan (really, adding, $219,000
in claims kills my plan. Odd, huh?)
Anyone have a sample objection??
Confirmation hearing in this already hard-fought BK is May 26 with VK.
WTHeck do I do here?
1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
Pasadena, CA 91106
(626) 507-8090
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Except the wife owns another house and she is a non-debtor AND she has other
assets as well.
They were separated for over a year (2 years? not sure) when we
filed...they got back together in between filing and confirmation. Oh man
Pat I should have sent this case to you! hehe
So the liquidation analysis is arguably 100%...but we will not get confirmed
with this AND it is an "extra" house -- husband bought condo when separated,
lived in it for the separation time and now they are back in wife's house
and have no interest in the underwater condo in Palm Desert with insane HOA
fees.
It is arguably NOT 100%, but that is between her attorney's interpretation
and the trustee and the judge. Right now, everyone wants a 100% plan except
me, I was (don't ever let this be public!) was arguing for debt negotiation.
Argh.
1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
Pasadena, CA 91106
(626) 507-8090
"Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
slate."
"Like the witness protection program!"
"Exactly."
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Patrick Green wrote:
>
>
> Amy:
>
>
>
> Why do you need a 100% plan?
>
>
>
> What if you do not object, amend the plan and schedules and let it be
> confirmed with WFB as an unsecured and then get declaratory relief stating
> that WFB has chosen their remedy and thus lost their security. Let them get
> .01% of the principal balance from the unsecured pool and the remainder
> discharged at the end of the plan. Client gets house for pennies.
>
>
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
>
>
>
> Pat
>
>
>
> Patrick T. Green, Esq.
>
> Fitzgerald & Green
>
> Attorneys at Law
>
> 1010 E. Union Street
>
> Suite 206
>
> Pasadena, CA 91106
>
> Tel: 626-449-8433
>
> Fax: 626-449-0565
>
> pat@fitzgreenlaw.com
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf
> Of *Amy Clark
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 12, 2010 5:06 PM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Objection to Mortgage claim when home has been
> surrendered
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
>
> Chapter 13 plan -- debtor is surrendering his property. We spoke to
> prior servicer and were going to stipulate to relief from stay but
> loan has been transferred to WF.
>
> Wells Fargo promptly filed Mt for relief from stay.
>
> We are filing Non-opposition.
>
> WF then files claim for full amount of mortgage -- this is violation
> of one action rule PLUS kills the 100% plan (really, adding, $219,000
> in claims kills my plan. Odd, huh?)
>
> Anyone have a sample objection??
>
> Confirmation hearing in this already hard-fought BK is May 26 with VK.
>
> WTHeck do I do here?
>
> -- Amy Clark Kleinpeter
>
> 1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
> Pasadena, CA 91106
> (626) 507-8090
>
> "Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
> slate."
>
> "Like the witness protection program!"
>
> "Exactly."
>
>
>
Except the wife owns another house and she is a non-debtor AND she has other assets as well.They were separated for over a year (2 years? not sure) when we filed...they got back together in between filing and confirmation. Oh man Pat I should have sent this case to you! hehe
So the liquidation analysis is arguably 100%...but we will not get confirmed with this AND it is an "extra" house -- husband bought condo when separated, lived in it for the separation time and now they are back in wife's house and have no interest in the underwater condo in Palm Desert with insane HOA fees.
It is arguably NOT 100%, but that is between her attorney's interpretation and the trustee and the judge. Right now, everyone wants a 100% plan except me, I was (don't ever let this be public!) was arguing for debt negotiation. Argh.
-- Amy Clark Kleinpeter1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207Pasadena, CA 91106(626) 507-8090"Bankruptcy, Mic
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
They are in the first position -- there is actually only one mortgage on the
property.
HOWEVER, if it was a Purchase Money Mortgage then even if it is the junior I
would still object, just on different basis. There are state law arguments
that any PMM, such as for those 80:20 loans, goes away in a non-judicial
foreclosure.
And by "goes away", I mean has no recourse against the homeowner. This is
an easy argument when the "80" and the "20" are both the same lender but
even when they are not, there are arguments to be made.
1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
Pasadena, CA 91106
(626) 507-8090
"Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
slate."
"Like the witness protection program!"
"Exactly."
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Larry Simons wrote:
>
>
> Is Wells in first position or junior trust deed holder?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf
> Of *Amy Clark
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 12, 2010 5:06 PM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Objection to Mortgage claim when home has been
> surrendered
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Chapter 13 plan -- debtor is surrendering his property. We spoke to
> prior servicer and were going to stipulate to relief from stay but
> loan has been transferred to WF.
>
> Wells Fargo promptly filed Mt for relief from stay.
>
> We are filing Non-opposition.
>
> WF then files claim for full amount of mortgage -- this is violation
> of one action rule PLUS kills the 100% plan (really, adding, $219,000
> in claims kills my plan. Odd, huh?)
>
> Anyone have a sample objection??
>
> Confirmation hearing in this already hard-fought BK is May 26 with VK.
>
> WTHeck do I do here?
>
> -- Amy Clark Kleinpeter
>
> 1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207
> Pasadena, CA 91106
> (626) 507-8090
>
> "Bankruptcy, Michael, is nature's do-over. It's a fresh start, a clean
> slate."
>
> "Like the witness protection program!"
>
> "Exactly."
>
>
>
They are in the first position -- there is actually only one mortgage on the property.HOWEVER, if it was a Purchase Money Mortgage then even if it is the junior I would still object, just on different basis. There are state law arguments that any PMM, such as for those 80:20 loans, goes away in a non-judicial foreclosure.
And by "goes away", I mean has no recourse against the homeowner. This is an easy argument when the "80" and the "20" are both the same lender but even when they are not, there are arguments to be made.
-- Amy Clark Kleinpeter1489 E. Colorado Blvd. #207Pasadena, CA 91106(626) 507-8090"Bankruptcy, Mic
The post was migrated from Yahoo.