.jpg)
CH 7 trustee files Motion to Determine reasonableness of fees
The purpose of bankruptcy is to give the honest debtor a fresh start. By
structuring fees in such a manner that consumers will exit it with new
debt -- and at a premium in cost -- to the very person that helped them
seems to be at cross-purposes.
Of course many debtors don't have the means to plunk down an attorney
fee at once, and there are always those with great urgency that need to
file tomorrow with no time to gather funds to pay the fee before the
case is filed. For the occasional case needing relief urgently, in a
great act of compassion we can reduce the fee to pro bono (or de
minimis) or refer the consumer to the self-help desk, etc.
But a business model displaying a persistent pattern of charging more
than the market rate (as in the Idaho example) and (if I read the 341a
transcript correctly the SDCA instance) seemingly implying that
prepetition services were done postpetition to get around the discharge
so that debtors owe their own lawyer postdischarge seems to hurt the
consumers we're to protect and enriching the lawyer while hurting their
own client.
I realize that BK Billing is used by attorneys in other districts, and I
don't fault, in theory, these practitioners for trying to get debtors
financed while trying to keep their own business afloat in a down
market. But the means I believe are harmful to the consumer and undercut
those who are trying to maintain their practice through more
conventional means to give honest debtors a fresh start.
Hale
On 2/9/2018 2:56 PM, 'Steven B. Lever' sblever@leverlaw.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
> I think I’m missing how using BK Billing delegitimizes an attorney.
> It’s the same work more or less – only how the fees is paid is different.
>
> I’ve filed a few cases where the debtor had no money, no other way of
> getting money, and was having their wages garnished for a substantial
> sum. Otherwise, I think the costs are excessive. But I offer the
> financing in that situation. I’m very transparent about the cash
> price versus the postpetition financing, and many people figure
> another way to come up with the funds from friends/relatives when they
> see that.
>
> Also, unless you’re doing a lot of cases financed this way, due to
> escrowed accounts for part of the factoring of the postpetition
> invoice, it’s a pretty bad deal for the attorney. I usually take a
> little bit of a haircut myself compared to a cash price, since the
> costs are also in that fee sometimes.
>
> I can see how people would take umbrage at the mill business model
> that takes advantage of financially unsophisticated debtors, but
> that’s not the only use of this postpetition financing model.
>
> Steve Lever
>
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 09, 2018 11:26 AM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Re: CH 7 trustee files Motion to Determine
> reasonableness of fees (Idaho) for postpetition payments
>
> This is happening in Calif also. I recall seeing last month where the
> US Trustee went after a firm (BK Billing) in San Diego for this sort
> of arrangement. Why pay a legitimate attorney anything for Chapter 7
> when someone else will do it for no money down?
>
> On 2/8/2018 6:28 PM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
> See attached. I thought this might be of interest.
>
> We have some firms doing "prepetition" and "postpetition"
> agreements in Chapter 7s. The UST does not like it and I don't
> either. I can't compete with that.
>
>
> Holly Roark
>
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>
> /and Sports Lawyer/
>
> holly@roarklawoffices.com
> **primary email address**
>
> www..roarklawoffices.com
>
> *_Central District of California & District of Idaho_*- Consumer
> Bankruptcy Attorney
>
> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
>
> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>
> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>
> --
> */Hale Andrew Antico/*
>
> (661) 252-9900
> http://www.ScvBankruptcy.com
>
> /Vice-President, Board Member, Central Dist Consumer Bankruptcy
> Attorneys' Assn.(CDCBAA)/
> /Past President, Board Member, James T. King Bankruptcy Inn of Court/
> /Member, National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (NACBA)/
>
> /We are a federally designated Debt Relief Agency under the United
> States Bankruptcy Laws./
> /We assist people with finding solutions to their debt problems,
> including, where appropriate, assisting them with the filing of
> petitions for relief under the United States Bankruptcy Code./
>
> /Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with
> me by email, you understand that it's not confidential./
>
> /This does not constitute an electronic signature./
>
>
*/Hale Andrew Antico/*
(661) 252-9900
http://www.ScvBankruptcy.com
/Vice-President, Board Member, Central Dist Consumer Bankruptcy
Attorneys' Assn.(CDCBAA)/
/Past President, Board Member, James T. King Bankruptcy Inn of Court/
/Member, National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (NACBA)/
/We are a federally designated Debt Relief Agency under the United
States Bankruptcy Laws./
/We assist people with finding solutions to their debt problems,
including, where appropriate, assisting them with the filing of
petitions for relief under the United States Bankruptcy Code./
/Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with me
by email, you understand that it's not confidential./
/This does not constitute an electronic signature./
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
This is happening in Calif also. I recall seeing last month where the US
Trustee went after a firm (BK Billing) in San Diego for this sort of
arrangement. Why pay a legitimate attorney anything for Chapter 7 when
someone else will do it for no money down?
On 2/8/2018 6:28 PM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
> See attached. I thought this might be of interest.
>
> We have some firms doing "prepetition" and "postpetition" agreements
> in Chapter 7s. The UST does not like it and I don't either. I can't
> compete with that.
>
>
> Holly Roark
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
> /and Sports Lawyer/
> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary
> email address**
> www..roarklawoffices.com
> *_Central District of California & District of Idaho_* - Consumer
> Bankruptcy Attorney
> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>
> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>
>
>
*/Hale Andrew Antico/*
(661) 252-9900
http://www.ScvBankruptcy.com
/Vice-President, Board Member, Central Dist Consumer Bankruptcy
Attorneys' Assn.(CDCBAA)/
/Past President, Board Member, James T. King Bankruptcy Inn of Court/
/Member, National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (NACBA)/
/We are a federally designated Debt Relief Agency under the United
States Bankruptcy Laws./
/We assist people with finding solutions to their debt problems,
including, where appropriate, assisting them with the filing of
petitions for relief under the United States Bankruptcy Code./
/Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with me
by email, you understand that it's not confidential./
/This does not constitute an electronic signature./
The post was migrated from Yahoo.