.jpg)
Chapter 13 Supplemental Attorney Fees Application=20
Group:
The court cannot tell which addresses are duplicate, wrong, etc.
So the court can only look at the whole list to see if you properly served the creditors. I cannot imagine how you would prove the negative that addresses are wrong, so at my office, we just serve the whole list.
d
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 25, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Mark Jessee wrote:
> Change of address forms for creditor filed by debtor are rejected by the clerk in my experience and they require a matrix amendment fee. When not rejected, most times the address is not updated. Even with filing the amended matrix the CM/ECF creditor list is not always updated and old addresses are never deleted. Hence this is why I do not find the CM/ECF creditor list very useful, especially farther into chapter 13 cases.
>
> So again the question is does LBR 3015(x)'s requirement to serve all creditors mean we need to use the CM/ECF creditor list for service with all the superfluous names and addresses? VK seems to be saying we do....
>
> Mark Jessee
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 25, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
>
>>
>> So perhaps the best practice is to amend the matrix to exclude redundant addresses and then use the matrix for service of supplemental fee apps over $1000.
>>
>> On Jun 25, 2013 12:30 PM, "Catherine Christiansen" wrote:
>>>
>>> If the creditor is already listed then filing a change of address is free and I believe also updates the BNC
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Link Schrader wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Court will automatically (usually) update from POCs and transfers of claims. A $30 amendment fee is charged to add or delete creditors, DEF, so I normally update my master mailing list to ensure I am serving necessary parties and only amend DEF when necessary for the Court's service. Even then it might be easier toward the end of the case for me to separately serve a party not served through the BNC.
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 25, 2013 6:04 AM, "Kirk Brennan" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>>>>>
>>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>>>>>
>>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@ymail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon receipt of POC?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Sups.com CC:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark Jessee
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
>>>>>> CA 92701
>>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>>
>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
>>>> CA 92701
>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>>
>>>> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7) >>>> RECENT ACTIVITY:
>
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure (FRBP) Rule 2002(a) requires notice
to the debtor, the trustee, all creditors and indenture trustees of less than 21 days notice by mail of ...(6) a hearing on any entity's
request for compensation or reimbursement of expenses if the request
exceeds $1,000;... Further, FRBP 2002(g) states that notices required to
be mailed under Rule 2002shall be addressed to such entity or an
authorized agent has directed in its last request filed in the particular
case. A proof of claim filed by a creditor constitutes a filed request to
mail notices to that address. FRBP 2002(g)(1)(A). There is no requirement
that notice be mailed on all parties designated in a debtors schedules as
schedules have been changed by an act of the creditor (i.e. filing a POC or
transfer).
However, I once had an attorney for the U.S. Trustee in a Chapter 11 case
insist that I serve all of the creditors listed on the Court's mailing
list. While I let him know the reason I disagreed with him, I did it
anyway to avoid extra work and conflict in that case.
*Link Schrader, Attorney*
Law Office of Link W. Schrader
Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
www.schrader-law.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
charset-ascii
Change of address forms for creditor filed by debtor are rejected by the clerk in my experience and they require a matrix amendment fee. When not rejected, most times the address is not updated. Even with filing the amended matrix the CM/ECF creditor list is not always updated and old addresses are never deleted. Hence this is why I do not find the CM/ECF creditor list very useful, especially farther into chapter 13 cases.
So again the question is does LBR 3015(x)'s requirement to serve all creditors mean we need to use the CM/ECF creditor list for service with all the superfluous names and addresses? VK seems to be saying we do....
Mark Jessee
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
> So perhaps the best practice is to amend the matrix to exclude redundant addresses and then use the matrix for service of supplemental fee apps over $1000.
>
> On Jun 25, 2013 12:30 PM, "Catherine Christiansen" wrote:
>>
>> If the creditor is already listed then filing a change of address is free and I believe also updates the BNC
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Link Schrader wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The Court will automatically (usually) update from POCs and transfers of claims. A $30 amendment fee is charged to add or delete creditors, DEF, so I normally update my master mailing list to ensure I am serving necessary parties and only amend DEF when necessary for the Court's service. Even then it might be easier toward the end of the case for me to separately serve a party not served through the BNC.
>>>
>>> On Jun 25, 2013 6:04 AM, "Kirk Brennan" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
>>>>>
>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>>>>
>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>>>>
>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>>>>
>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
>>>>>
>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>>>>
>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>>>>
>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@ymail.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon receipt of POC?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Suppps.com CC:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark Jessee
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
>>>>> CA 92701
>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>
>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
>>> CA 92701
>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>
>>> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)
>>> RECENT ACTIVITY:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
So perhaps the best practice is to amend the matrix to exclude redundant
addresses and then use the matrix for service of supplemental fee apps over
$1000.
On Jun 25, 2013 12:30 PM, "Catherine Christiansen" wrote:
> **
>
>
> If the creditor is already listed then filing a change of address is free
> and I believe also updates the BNC
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 25, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Link Schrader
> wrote:
>
>
>
> The Court will automatically (usually) update from POCs and transfers of
> claims. A $30 amendment fee is charged to add or delete creditors, DEF, so
> I normally update my master mailing list to ensure I am serving necessary
> parties and only amend DEF when necessary for the Court's service. Even
> then it might be easier toward the end of the case for me to separately
> serve a party not served through the BNC.
> On Jun 25, 2013 6:04 AM, "Kirk Brennan" wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
>> On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>>
>>> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a
>>> requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then
>>> that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address
>>> the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
>>>
>>> *Link Schrader, Attorney*
>>>
>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>>
>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>>
>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
>>>
>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>>
>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>>
>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> *This communication and any files transmitted with it contain
>>> information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from
>>> disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the
>>> individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use,
>>> dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
>>> you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender.
>>> Thank you for your cooperation.*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@ymail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon
>>>> receipt of POC?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13
>>>> cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com CC:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
>>>> supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>>>>
>>>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I
>>>> allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all
>>>> creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue
>>>> raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the
>>>> CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to
>>>> me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of
>>>> creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes
>>>> every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the
>>>> start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old
>>>> addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new
>>>> addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>>>>
>>>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require
>>>> service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR
>>>> 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense
>>>> unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad
>>>> addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on
>>>> the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to
>>>> mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those
>>>> which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the
>>>> specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any
>>>> amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve
>>>> notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they
>>>> chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim.
>>>> What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of
>>>> claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
>>>> required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim
>>>> as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several
>>>> different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to
>>>> do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges
>>>> consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of
>>>> motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and
>>>> filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not
>>>> entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this
>>>> equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor
>>>> List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>>>>
>>>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF
>>>> Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>>>>
>>>> Mark Jessee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> *Link Schrader, Attorney*
>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
>>> CA 92701
>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>> ______________________________**______________________________**
>>> ______________________________**____________
>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information
>>> which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure
>>> under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual
>>> or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination
>>> or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>>> received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you
>>> for your cooperation.
>>>
>>>
> *Link Schrader, Attorney*
> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
> CA 92701
> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> www.schrader-law.com
> ______________________________**______________________________**
> ______________________________**____________
> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information
> which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure
> under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual
> or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination
> or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you
> for your cooperation.
>
> Reply via web post
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
charset-ascii
If the creditor is already listed then filing a change of address is free and I believe also updates the BNC
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Link Schrader wrote:
> The Court will automatically (usually) update from POCs and transfers of claims. A $30 amendment fee is charged to add or delete creditors, DEF, so I normally update my master mailing list to ensure I am serving necessary parties and only amend DEF when necessary for the Court's service. Even then it might be easier toward the end of the case for me to separately serve a party not served through the BNC.
>
> On Jun 25, 2013 6:04 AM, "Kirk Brennan" wrote:
>>
>> How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
>>
>> On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" wrote:
>>>
>>> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
>>>
>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>>
>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>>
>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>>
>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
>>>
>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>>
>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>>
>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@ymail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon receipt of POC?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Suppleom CC:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>>>>
>>>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>>>>
>>>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>>>>
>>>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>>>>
>>>> Mark Jessee
>>>
>>>
>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
>>> CA 92701
>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>> www.schrader-law.com
>>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>
> Link Schrader, Attorney
> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
> CA 92701
> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> www.schrader-law.com
> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
>
>
> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7) > RECENT ACTIVITY:
> Visit Your Group
> Switch to:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
The Court will automatically (usually) update from POCs and transfers of
claims. A $30 amendment fee is charged to add or delete creditors, DEF, so
I normally update my master mailing list to ensure I am serving necessary
parties and only amend DEF when necessary for the Court's service. Even
then it might be easier toward the end of the case for me to separately
serve a party not served through the BNC.
On Jun 25, 2013 6:04 AM, "Kirk Brennan" wrote:
> **
>
>
> How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
> On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader"
> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a
>> requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then
>> that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address
>> the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
>>
>> *Link Schrader, Attorney*
>>
>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>>
>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>
>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
>>
>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>
>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>
>> www.schrader-law.com
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>
>> *This communication and any files transmitted with it contain
>> information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from
>> disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the
>> individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use,
>> dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
>> you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender.
>> Thank you for your cooperation.*
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@ymail.com wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>>
>>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon
>>> receipt of POC?
>>>
>>>
>>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13
>>> cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com CC:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
>>> supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>>>
>>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I
>>> allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all
>>> creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue
>>> raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the
>>> CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to
>>> me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of
>>> creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes
>>> every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the
>>> start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old
>>> addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new
>>> addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>>>
>>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require
>>> service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR
>>> 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense
>>> unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad
>>> addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on
>>> the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to
>>> mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those
>>> which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the
>>> specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any
>>> amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve
>>> notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they
>>> chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim.
>>> What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of
>>> claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>>>
>>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
>>> required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim
>>> as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several
>>> different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to
>>> do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges
>>> consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of
>>> motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and
>>> filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not
>>> entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this
>>> equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor
>>> List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>>>
>>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF
>>> Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>>>
>>> Mark Jessee
>>>
>>>
>>
>> *Link Schrader, Attorney*
>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
>> CA 92701
>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>> www.schrader-law.com
>> ______________________________**______________________________**
>> ______________________________**____________
>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information
>> which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure
>> under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual
>> or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination
>> or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>> received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you
>> for your cooperation.
>>
>>
>
*Link Schrader, Attorney*
Law Office of Link W. Schrader
Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
CA 92701
Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
www.schrader-law.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" wrote:
> **
>
>
> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a
> requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then
> that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address
> the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
>
> *Link Schrader, Attorney*
>
> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
>
> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>
> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
>
> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>
> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>
> www.schrader-law.com
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> *This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information
> which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure
> under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual
> or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination
> or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you
> for your cooperation.*
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@ymail.com wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon receipt
>> of POC?
>>
>>
>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13
>> cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com CC:
>>
>>
>>
>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
>> supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>>
>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I
>> allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all
>> creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue
>> raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the
>> CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to
>> me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of
>> creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes
>> every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the
>> start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old
>> addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new
>> addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>>
>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require
>> service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR
>> 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense
>> unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad
>> addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on
>> the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to
>> mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those
>> which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the
>> specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any
>> amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve
>> notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they
>> chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim.
>> What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of
>> claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>>
>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
>> required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim
>> as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several
>> different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to
>> do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges
>> consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of
>> motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and
>> filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not
>> entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this
>> equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor
>> List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>>
>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF
>> Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>>
>> Mark Jessee
>>
>>
>
> *Link Schrader, Attorney*
> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
> CA 92701
> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> www.schrader-law.com
> ______________________________**______________________________**
> ______________________________**____________
> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information
> which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure
> under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual
> or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination
> or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you
> for your cooperation.
>
>
>
How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" <lschrader@schrader-law.com> wrote:
Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
Link Schrader, Attorney
Law Office of Link W. Schrader
Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA
92701
Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
www.schrader-law.com
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
This communication and any files transmitted with it
contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the
individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender.
Thank you for your cooperation.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@ymail.com <bertbri@ymail.com> wrote:
perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon receipt of POC?From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13 Supplemental Attorney Fees Application
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
CC:
Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
Mark Jessee
Link Schrader, AttorneyLaw Office of Link W. SchraderMail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
CA 92701Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
San Diego:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a
requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then
that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address
the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
*Link Schrader, Attorney*
Law Office of Link W. Schrader
Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
www.schrader-law.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.