.jpg)
Ch. 20 question
The order entered on a506(a) & 506(d)motion or complaintprovides thatthe
claimis allowed only as general unsecured.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Wed, April 20, 2011 2:29:48 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Peter et all:
If claim filed, Secured claim is allowed unless there is an objection. valuations are not objections, so I don't follow.
D
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 19, 2011, at 11:10 AM, P L wrote:
>Dennis, I didn't catch until now that this section only applies to an>secured claim" so after successful use of 506(a) it is not applicable to the
>Chapter 20 lien stripping.
>Peter
>
>Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
>The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Thu, April 14, 2011 9:52:44 PM
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>
>
>1325 requires:
>(I) the holder of such claim retain the lien securing such claim until the>earlier of(aa) the payment of the underlying debt determined under
>nonbankruptcy
>law; or
>(bb) discharge under section 1328;
>
>therefore, if no discharge, lien survives....
>
>--- On Tue, 4/12/11, Shan Thever wrote:
>
>
>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>Cc: "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
>>Date: Tuesday, April 12, 2011, 4:54 AM
>>
>>
>>
>>What is the rationale?
>>
>>
>>On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It would not be allowed
>>>
>>>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE
>>>AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
>>>IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT>>>RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>>THANK YOU.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
________________________________
>>>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>>Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 5:31:56 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>So a lien strip motion will fail?
>>>
>>>
>>>On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Correct. Court will confirm the Plan and issue a notice that no discharge will
>>>>issue
>>>>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE
>>>>AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
>>>>IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT>>>>RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>>>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>>>THANK YOU.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
________________________________
>>>>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>>>Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 3:51:03 PM
>>>>Subject: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Just making sure:
>>>>
>>>>If a debtor just completed a Chapter 7 case, but now wants to do a
>>>>Chapter 13 solely to cure arrearages on their home and reinstate the
>>>>loans, that can be done, right? There wouldn't be any discharge or
>>>>lienstripping.
>>>>
>>>>*************************
>>>>Mark J. Markus
>>>>Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>>>>11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>>>>Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>>>>(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>>>>web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>>>>This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this
>>>>means at
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Peter et all:
If claim filed, Secured claim is allowed unless there is an objection. 506 valuations are not objections, so I don't follow.
D
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 19, 2011, at 11:10 AM, P L wrote:
> Dennis, I didn't catch until now that this section only applies to an "allowed secured claim" so after successful use of 506(a) it is not applicable to the Chapter 20 lien stripping.
> Peter
>
> Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
>
> The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
>
>
>
>
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, April 14, 2011 9:52:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>
>
> 1325 requires:
>
> (I) the holder of such claim retain the lien securing such claim until the earlier of
>
> (aa) the payment of the underlying debt determined under nonbankruptcy
> law; or
> (bb) discharge under section 1328;
>
> therefore, if no discharge, lien survives....
>
>
> --- On Tue, 4/12/11, Shan Thever wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
> Date: Tuesday, April 12, 2011, 4:54 AM
>
>
> What is the rationale?
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz wrote:
>
> It would not be allowed
>
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
> LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
> 21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
> Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
> Telephone: (818) 226-1205
> Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>
>
>
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>
>
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 5:31:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>
>
> So a lien strip motion will fail?
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz wrote:
>
> Correct. Court will confirm the Plan and issue a notice that no discharge will issue
>
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
> LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
> 21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
> Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
> Telephone: (818) 226-1205
> Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>
>
>
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
>
>
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 3:51:03 PM
> Subject: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>
>
> Just making sure:
>
> If a debtor just completed a Chapter 7 case, but now wants to do a
> Chapter 13 solely to cure arrearages on their home and reinstate the
> loans, that can be done, right? There wouldn't be any discharge or
> lienstripping.
>
> *************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this
> means at
> http://bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/2008/0 ... efinition/)
> ________________________________________________
> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law
> office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is
> intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the
> addressee, note that any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of
> the contents of this message is prohibited.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements
> imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained
> in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or
> written to be used, and cannot be used, 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 in this communication.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Brennan, esq.
> California Law Office, P.C.
> calibankrutpcysite.com
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
> TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion letters containing the signature of a director.
>
>
>
> Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
> Messages in this topic (31)
> RECENT ACTIVITY:
> Visit Your Group
> MARKETPLACE
> Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
>
Peter et all:If claim filed, Secured claim is allowed unless there is an objection. 506 valuations are not objections, so I don't follow.DSent from my iPhoneOn Apr 19, 2011, at 11:10 AM, P L <petermlively2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dennis, I didn't catch until now that this section only applies to an "allowed secured claim" so after successful use of 506(a) it is not applicable to the Chapter 20 lien stripping.
Peter
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: Dennis McGoldrick <easky1@yahoo.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Thu, April 14, 2011 9:52:44 PMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
1325 requires:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Dennis, I didn't catch until now that this section only applies to an"allowed
secured claim" so after successful use of 506(a) it is not applicable to the
Chapter 20 lien stripping.
Peter
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, April 14, 2011 9:52:44 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
1325 requires:
(I) the holder of such claim retain the lien securing such claim until theearlier of(aa) the payment of the underlying debt determined undernonbankruptcy
law; or
(bb) discharge under section 1328;
therefore, if no discharge, lien survives....
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>Cc: "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
>Date: Tuesday, April 12, 2011, 4:54 AM
>
>
>
>What is the rationale?
>
>
>On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
> wrote:
>
>
>>It would not be allowed
>>
>>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE
>>AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
>>IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT
>>RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>THANK YOU.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________
>>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 5:31:56 PM
>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>>
>>
>>
>>So a lien strip motion will fail?
>>
>>
>>On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Correct. Court will confirm the Plan and issue a notice that no discharge will
>>>issue
>>>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE
>>>AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
>>>IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT>>>RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>>THANK YOU.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
________________________________
>>>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>>Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 3:51:03 PM
>>>Subject: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Just making sure:
>>>
>>>If a debtor just completed a Chapter 7 case, but now wants to do a
>>>Chapter 13 solely to cure arrearages on their home and reinstate the
>>>loans, that can be done, right? There wouldn't be any discharge or
>>>lienstripping.
>>>
>>>*************************
>>>Mark J. Markus
>>>Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>>>11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>>>Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>>>(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>>>web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>>>This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this
>>>means at
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
However, 1327(c) vests all of the property of the estate in the debtor at
confirmation "free and clear of any claim or interest of any creditor provided
for in the plan."
Therefore, no discharge requiredif plan provides forstripped note and 506(d)
order is effective uponcompletion of payments.
One must alter the Chapter 13 form plan which ispossible under the local rules.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, April 14, 2011 9:52:44 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
1325 requires:
(I) the holder of such claim retain the lien securing such claim until theearlier of(aa) the payment of the underlying debt determined undernonbankruptcy
law; or
(bb) discharge under section 1328;
therefore, if no discharge, lien survives....
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>Cc: "Kenneth Jay Schwartz"
>Date: Tuesday, April 12, 2011, 4:54 AM
>
>
>
>What is the rationale?
>
>
>On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
> wrote:
>
>
>>It would not be allowed
>>
>>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE
>>AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
>>IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT
>>RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>THANK YOU.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________
>>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 5:31:56 PM
>>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>>
>>
>>
>>So a lien strip motion will fail?
>>
>>
>>On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Correct. Court will confirm the Plan and issue a notice that no discharge will
>>>issue
>>>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>>>LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
>>>21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
>>>Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
>>>Telephone: (818) 226-1205
>>>Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
>>>CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE
>>>AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
>>>IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT>>>RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
>>>NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,
>>>DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
>>>IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
>>>THANK YOU.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
________________________________
>>>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>>>Sent: Mon, April 11, 2011 3:51:03 PM
>>>Subject: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Just making sure:
>>>
>>>If a debtor just completed a Chapter 7 case, but now wants to do a
>>>Chapter 13 solely to cure arrearages on their home and reinstate the
>>>loans, that can be done, right? There wouldn't be any discharge or
>>>lienstripping.
>>>
>>>*************************
>>>Mark J. Markus
>>>Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>>>11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>>>Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>>>(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>>>web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>>>This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this
>>>means at
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
1325 requires:
(I) the holder of such claim retain the lien securing such claim until the earlier of
(aa) the payment of the underlying debt determined under nonbankruptcy
law; or
(bb) discharge under section 1328;
therefore, if no discharge, lien survives....
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Here you go. See Q 6b.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 12:49:17 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Peter, could you please repost your analysis.
Thank you
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE
AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT
RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 11:53:07 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question [1 Attachment]
Renay,
Ch13 when discharge is not available and the forms committee was well
aware.Please review the attached NACBA brief on this issue and my analysis
with citations prepared for the 2010NCBJ previouslyposted.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 9:58:47 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip were
published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as one of the
options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a choice...... and
is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and more recent decisions
in other districts, these judges might reconsider under the right
circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a chapter 7 that later
messed up the person from eliminating a second they could have gotten rid of if
their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
Renay
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
wrote:
>Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decision
>
>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>
Here you go. See Q 6b.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: Kenneth Jay Schwartz <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Wed, April 13, 2011 12:49:17 PMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Peter, could you please repost your analysis.
Thank you Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.
From: P L <petermlively2000@yahoo.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Wed, April 13, 2011 11:53:07 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question [1 Attachment]
Renay,
Several courts (other than CDCA SV Division) have allowed use of 506(d) in Ch13 when discharge is not available and the forms committee was well aware. Please review the attached NACBA brief on this issue and my analysis with citations prepared for the 2010 NCBJ previously posted.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: R Grace Rodriguez <rgracelaw@gmail.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Wed, April 13, 2011 9:58:47 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip were published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as one of the options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a choice...... and is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and more recent decisions in other districts, these judges might reconsider under the right circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a chapter 7 that later messed up the person from eliminating a second they could have gotten rid of if their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
Renay
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Peter, could you please repost your analysis.
Thank you
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 11:53:07 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question [1 Attachment]
[Attachment(s) from P L included below]
Renay,
Several courts (other than CDCA SV Division) have allowed use of 506(d) in
Ch13 when discharge is not available and the forms committee was well
aware. Please review the attached NACBA brief on this issue and my analysis
with citations prepared for the 2010 NCBJ previously posted.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 9:58:47 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip were
published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as one of the
options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a choice...... and
is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and more recent decisions
in other districts, these judges might reconsider under the right
circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a chapter 7 that later
messed up the person from eliminating a second they could have gotten rid of if
their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
Renay
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
wrote:
>Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decision
>
>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>
Peter, could you please repost your analysis.Thank you Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: P L <petermlively2000@yahoo.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Wed, April 13, 2011 11:53:07 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question [1 Attachment]
Renay,
Several courts (other than CDCA SV Division) have allowed use of 506(d) in Ch13 when discharge is not available and the forms committee was well aware. Please review the attached NACBA brief on this issue and my analysis with citations prepared for the 2010 NCBJ previously posted.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: R Grace Rodriguez <rgracelaw@gmail.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Wed, April 13, 2011 9:58:47 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip were published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as one of the options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a choice...... and is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and more recent decisions in other districts, these judges might reconsider under the right circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a chapter 7 that later messed up the person from eliminating a second they could have gotten rid of if their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
Renay
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decision
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Renay,
Ch13 when discharge is not available and the forms committee was well
aware.Please review the attached NACBA brief on this issue and my analysis
with citations prepared for the 2010NCBJ previouslyposted.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center* Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 9:58:47 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip were
published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as one of the
options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a choice...... and
is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and more recent decisions
in other districts, these judges might reconsider under the right
circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a chapter 7 that later
messed up the person from eliminating a second they could have gotten rid of if
their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
Renay
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz
wrote:
>Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decision
>
>Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>
Renay,
Several courts (other than CDCA SV Division) have allowed use of 506(d) in Ch13 when discharge is not available and the forms committee was well aware. Please review the attached NACBA brief on this issue and my analysis with citations prepared for the 2010 NCBJ previously posted.
Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
The Personal Financial Law Center * Culver City & Costa Mesa * 800-307-DEBT
From: R Grace Rodriguez <rgracelaw@gmail.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Wed, April 13, 2011 9:58:47 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip were published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as one of the options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a choice...... and is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and more recent decisions in other districts, these judges might reconsider under the right circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a chapter 7 that later messed up the person from eliminating a second they could have gotten rid of if their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
Renay
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz <
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip
were published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as
one of the options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a
choice...... and is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and
more recent decisions in other districts, these judges might reconsider
under the right circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a
chapter 7 that later messed up the person from eliminating a second they
could have gotten rid of if their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
Renay
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz wrote:
>
>
> Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decision
>
> Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
>
Question: Since the Winitzky decision, the FORMS for doing a lien strip were published. Why would they leave a choice for "Completion of Plan" as one of the options for granting the lien strip? Was that to give judges a choice...... and is it possible that under the adoption of the forms, and more recent decisions in other districts, these judges might reconsider under the right circumstances.... such as an inadequate attorney filing a chapter 7 that later messed up the person from eliminating a second they could have gotten rid of if their first attorney had filed a chapter 13?
RenayOn Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Kenneth Jay Schwartz <kennethjschwartz@yahoo.com> wrote:
Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decisionKenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decision
Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640
Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226
Telephone: (818) 226-1205
Facsimile : (818) 226-1213
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY
BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN
AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY
NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW,DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY.
THANK YOU.
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 7:11:09 AM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Dear listmates: I have been researching and talking to a lot of other attorneys
about this issue. I don't think it is fair to say that a Lien Strip would not
be allowed.
I was told that VICTORIA KAUFMAN will allow a lien strip in a "Chapter 20."Todd Roberts brought to my attention that the form for doing a lien strip
indicates you can request relief upon COMPLETION of THE PLAN as opposed to a
discharge. There are some judges who will grant this motion. However, somejudges are still with the idea that a discharge is NECESSARy in order to get
lien strip.
So it could well be luck of the draw in the Valley. But I don't know which side
of the fence the other judges fall. Anyone know? Discharge vs. completion of
plan.
I think with the right warning to a client that it could be a lottery pull I
don't think those people who were so ILL ADVISED to file a chapter 7 in the
hopes of getting loan modification when they had a 2nd on their home that could
have been stripped..... by the way is that malpractice if those attorneys didn't
tell clients that they had opportunity to get a lien strip but just because they
didn't know how to do a chapter 13 convinced them to do a 7...... disgusting.
I pain for those people. But these are the people that are now calling me to
fix it with a Chapter 13 and I'm telling them to hold on a sec while I ask the
gurus.
Proper disclosure that it may not work and it may be the luck of the draw? What
say some of you?
Best regards
R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
but you can call me RENAY!
Hugs
Bye
Judges Tighe, Mund, and Thompson all signed off on the Winitzky decision Kenneth Jay Schwartz, Esq.LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH JAY SCHWARTZ21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 640Woodland Hills, California 91364-2226Telephone: (818) 226-1205Facsimile : (818) 226-1213THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND, AS SUCH, IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR AN AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, AND THAT ANY REVIEW, DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU.From: R Grace Rodriguez <rgracelaw@gmail.com>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSent: Wed, April 13, 2011 7:11:09 AMSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Ch. 20 question
Dear listmates: I have been researching and talking to a lot of other attorneys about this issue. I don't think it is fair to say that a Lien Strip would not be allowed.I was told that VICTORIA KAUFMAN will allow a lien strip in a "Chapter 20." Todd Roberts brought to my attention that the form for doing a lien strip indicates you can request relief upon COMPLETION of THE PLAN as opposed to a discharge. There are some judges who will grant this motion. However, some judges are still with the idea that a discharge is NECESSARy in order to get lien strip.
So it could well be luck of the draw in the Valley. But I don't know which side of the fence the other judges fall. Anyone know? Discharge vs. completion of plan.I think with the right warning to a client that it could be a lottery pull I don't think those people who were so ILL ADVISED to file a chapter 7 in the hopes of getting loan modification when they had a 2nd on their home that could have been stripped..... by the way is that malpractice if those attorneys didn't tell clients that they had opportunity to get a lien strip but just because they didn't know how to do a chapter 13 convinced them to do a 7...... disgusting. I pain for those people. But these are the people that are now calling me to fix it with a Chapter 13 and I'm telling them to hold on a sec while I ask the gurus.
Proper disclosure that it may not work and it may be the luck of the draw? What say some of you?Best regardsR. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.but you can call me RENAY!Hugs Bye
The post was migrated from Yahoo.