Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

In 2003 we had the same issue in SDNY and EDNY. A huge BPP problem,
consumers who ended up with the short end of the stick, and an overall bad
situation. EOUST took severe action to bring the BPP industry in line with
the law. Some left, some stayed.
My problem is that looking at the schedules it's clear that the BPPs are
helping debtors choose exemptions and, as such, giving legal advice.
People are getting screwed and the courts seem to realize it but can't do
much sua sponte. From what I gather, trustees don't dive into the issue
much either.
As consumer advocates, part of our job is to protect the consumer. With
resources such as Public Counsel and the self-help desk, consumers who
cannot afford private representation can be helped effectively.
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:47 PM, James T. King wrote:
> **
>
>
> The Central District of California has ALWAYS had the highest rate of
> self represented debtors since I went into practice a few years ago.
> Everything has been tried, Judges have special programs, Public Counsel has
> attempted to assist them and avoid the BPP (Bankruptcy Petition Preparers),
> we even started a Self Help Desk for the self represented debtor and
> avoid the BPP. The OUST goes after the bad ones and is usually
> successful. BUT, we still have the highest rate in the nation and probably
> always will. But if you think you have designed a better wheel. Go for it.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf
> Of *Jay Fleischman
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 25, 2012 2:16 PM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Pro Per Issue In CDCA - A Solution?****
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
> Folks, I'm new and naive around these parts so forgive me in advance if
> what I'm proposing is a bit Polyanna. But please stick with me on this for
> a few minutes.****
>
> ** **
>
> In preparation for my admission and move to the area, I scoured the ECF
> system for Los Angeles matters. Trying to get the lay of the land, as it
> were. I found that there are a ton of people filing their cases without
> the assistance of a lawyer. For the most part, these non-attorney petition
> preparers are not disclosed on the schedules or during the 341 meeting.***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> The US Trustee has not, to my knowledge, brought any actions against the
> non-attorney petition preparers ....even though the debtor often pays a
> large sum of money to the non-attorney.****
>
> ** **
>
> This amounts to not only a logjam in the court system, but harms consumers
> who rely upon non-attorneys for legal advice. In the context of a Chapter
> 13, 99% of cases filed without a lawyer are dismissed.****
>
> ** **
>
> If a debtor were to turn on a non-attorney petitioner preparer then it
> would be possible for fees to be disgorged under Section 110 as well as
> under section 330. Sanctions could be awarded against the petition
> preparer for failure to adhere to the requirements of section 528. The
> amount paid by the debtor pre-petition could be exempted by the debtor
> under section 522 (b).****
>
> ** **
>
> I'm actively looking for consumer debtors who have filed with a
> non-attorney so that I may bring an action on behalf of the debtor against
> the petition preparer. I know I'll likely not get paid for my time and
> efforts, but it seems to me that an injustice is being done to our
> consumers without anyone else taking action.****
>
> ** **
>
> I'd appreciate it if everyone would ask their clients if they've filed for
> bankruptcy without a lawyer in the past and had the case dismissed. If
> they're interested in possibly recovering their fees and making sure that
> other don't get taken advantage of in the future, let me know.****
>
> ** **
>
> In the alternative, if someone thinks I'm off my rocker please let me know.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> -------------****
>
> Jay S. Fleischman, Esq.****
>
> Shaev & Fleischman, LLP****
>
> Smart Solutions To Bill Problems****
>
> ** **
>
> T: 626-808-4343 x704****
>
> E: jay@sflawca.com****
>
> ** **
>
> www.ConsumerHelpCentral.com****
>
> ** **
>
> 556 S Fair Oaks Ave Ste 101-152****
>
> Pasadena CA 91105-2656****
>
> ** **
>
> Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with me by
> email, you understand that it's not confidential.****
>
> ****
>
>
>
In 2003 we had the same issue in SDNY and EDNY. A huge BPP problem, consumers who ended up with the short end of the stick, and an overall bad situation. EOUST took severe action to bring the BPP industry in line with the law. Some left, some stayed.
My problem is that looking at the schedules it's clear that the BPPs are helping debtors choose exemptions and, as such, giving legal advice. People are getting screwed and the courts seem to realize it
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

The Central District of California has ALWAYS had the highest rate of self represented debtors since I went into practice a few years ago. Everything has been tried, Judges have special programs, Public Counsel has attempted to assist them and avoid the BPP (Bankruptcy Petition Preparers), we even started a "Self Help Desk" for the self represented debtor and avoid the BPP. The OUST goes after the bad ones and is usually successful. BUT, we still have the highest rate in the nation and probably always will. But if you think you have designed a better wheel. Go for it.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Kirk, I'll look forward to it. I think that if the debtor attorneys in the
area band together this can create an enormous benefit to our clients and
to consumers in general.
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
> **
>
>
> Jay,
>
> It's a major issue in the CDCA, so you're definitely on the right track.
> I will email you off list with a referral.
>
> Best,
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Jay Fleischman wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> Folks, I'm new and naive around these parts so forgive me in advance if
>> what I'm proposing is a bit Polyanna. But please stick with me on this for
>> a few minutes.
>>
>> In preparation for my admission and move to the area, I scoured the ECF
>> system for Los Angeles matters. Trying to get the lay of the land, as it
>> were. I found that there are a ton of people filing their cases without
>> the assistance of a lawyer. For the most part, these non-attorney petition
>> preparers are not disclosed on the schedules or during the 341 meeting.
>>
>> The US Trustee has not, to my knowledge, brought any actions against the
>> non-attorney petition preparers ....even though the debtor often pays a
>> large sum of money to the non-attorney.
>>
>> This amounts to not only a logjam in the court system, but harms
>> consumers who rely upon non-attorneys for legal advice. In the context of
>> a Chapter 13, 99% of cases filed without a lawyer are dismissed.
>>
>> If a debtor were to turn on a non-attorney petitioner preparer then it
>> would be possible for fees to be disgorged under Section 110 as well as
>> under section 330. Sanctions could be awarded against the petition
>> preparer for failure to adhere to the requirements of section 528. The
>> amount paid by the debtor pre-petition could be exempted by the debtor
>> under section 522 (b).
>>
>> I'm actively looking for consumer debtors who have filed with a
>> non-attorney so that I may bring an action on behalf of the debtor against
>> the petition preparer. I know I'll likely not get paid for my time and
>> efforts, but it seems to me that an injustice is being done to our
>> consumers without anyone else taking action.
>>
>> I'd appreciate it if everyone would ask their clients if they've filed
>> for bankruptcy without a lawyer in the past and had the case dismissed. If
>> they're interested in possibly recovering their fees and making sure that
>> other don't get taken advantage of in the future, let me know.
>>
>> In the alternative, if someone thinks I'm off my rocker please let me
>> know.
>>
>> -------------
>> Jay S. Fleischman, Esq.
>> Shaev & Fleischman, LLP
>> Smart Solutions To Bill Problems
>>
>> T: 626-808-4343 x704
>> E: jay@sflawca.com
>>
>> www.ConsumerHelpCentral.com
>>
>> 556 S Fair Oaks Ave Ste 101-152
>> Pasadena CA 91105-2656
>>
>> Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with me
>> by email, you understand that it's not confidential.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Kirk Brennan, esq.
> California Law Office, P.C.
> www.calibankruptcysite.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.
>
>
>
Kirk, I'll look forward to it. I think that if the debtor attorneys in the area band together this can create an enormous benefit to our clients and to consumers in general.On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Kirk Brennan <kirkinhermosa@gmail.com> wrote:

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Jay,
It's a major issue in the CDCA, so you're definitely on the right track.
I will email you off list with a referral.
Best,
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Jay Fleischman wrote:
> **
>
>
> Folks, I'm new and naive around these parts so forgive me in advance if
> what I'm proposing is a bit Polyanna. But please stick with me on this for
> a few minutes.
>
> In preparation for my admission and move to the area, I scoured the ECF
> system for Los Angeles matters. Trying to get the lay of the land, as it
> were. I found that there are a ton of people filing their cases without
> the assistance of a lawyer. For the most part, these non-attorney petition
> preparers are not disclosed on the schedules or during the 341 meeting.
>
> The US Trustee has not, to my knowledge, brought any actions against the
> non-attorney petition preparers ....even though the debtor often pays a
> large sum of money to the non-attorney.
>
> This amounts to not only a logjam in the court system, but harms consumers
> who rely upon non-attorneys for legal advice. In the context of a Chapter
> 13, 99% of cases filed without a lawyer are dismissed.
>
> If a debtor were to turn on a non-attorney petitioner preparer then it
> would be possible for fees to be disgorged under Section 110 as well as
> under section 330. Sanctions could be awarded against the petition
> preparer for failure to adhere to the requirements of section 528. The
> amount paid by the debtor pre-petition could be exempted by the debtor
> under section 522 (b).
>
> I'm actively looking for consumer debtors who have filed with a
> non-attorney so that I may bring an action on behalf of the debtor against
> the petition preparer. I know I'll likely not get paid for my time and
> efforts, but it seems to me that an injustice is being done to our
> consumers without anyone else taking action.
>
> I'd appreciate it if everyone would ask their clients if they've filed for
> bankruptcy without a lawyer in the past and had the case dismissed. If
> they're interested in possibly recovering their fees and making sure that
> other don't get taken advantage of in the future, let me know.
>
> In the alternative, if someone thinks I'm off my rocker please let me know.
>
> -------------
> Jay S. Fleischman, Esq.
> Shaev & Fleischman, LLP
> Smart Solutions To Bill Problems
>
> T: 626-808-4343 x704
> E: jay@sflawca.com
>
> www.ConsumerHelpCentral.com
>
> 556 S Fair Oaks Ave Ste 101-152
> Pasadena CA 91105-2656
>
> Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with me by
> email, you understand that it's not confidential.
>
>
>
Kirk Brennan, esq.
California Law Office, P.C.
www.calibankruptcysite.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.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Folks, I'm new and naive around these parts so forgive me in advance if
what I'm proposing is a bit Polyanna. But please stick with me on this for
a few minutes.
In preparation for my admission and move to the area, I scoured the ECF
system for Los Angeles matters. Trying to get the lay of the land, as it
were. I found that there are a ton of people filing their cases without
the assistance of a lawyer. For the most part, these non-attorney petition
preparers are not disclosed on the schedules or during the 341 meeting.
The US Trustee has not, to my knowledge, brought any actions against the
non-attorney petition preparers ....even though the debtor often pays a
large sum of money to the non-attorney.
This amounts to not only a logjam in the court system, but harms consumers
who rely upon non-attorneys for legal advice. In the context of a Chapter
13, 99% of cases filed without a lawyer are dismissed.
If a debtor were to turn on a non-attorney petitioner preparer then it
would be possible for fees to be disgorged under Section 110 as well as
under section 330. Sanctions could be awarded against the petition
preparer for failure to adhere to the requirements of section 528. The
amount paid by the debtor pre-petition could be exempted by the debtor
under section 522 (b).
I'm actively looking for consumer debtors who have filed with a
non-attorney so that I may bring an action on behalf of the debtor against
the petition preparer. I know I'll likely not get paid for my time and
efforts, but it seems to me that an injustice is being done to our
consumers without anyone else taking action.
I'd appreciate it if everyone would ask their clients if they've filed for
bankruptcy without a lawyer in the past and had the case dismissed. If
they're interested in possibly recovering their fees and making sure that
other don't get taken advantage of in the future, let me know.
In the alternative, if someone thinks I'm off my rocker please let me know.
Jay S. Fleischman, Esq.
Shaev & Fleischman, LLP
Smart Solutions To Bill Problems
T: 626-808-4343 x704
E: jay@sflawca.com
www.ConsumerHelpCentral.com
556 S Fair Oaks Ave Ste 101-152
Pasadena CA 91105-2656
Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with me by
email, you understand that it's not confidential.
Folks, I'm new and naive around these parts so forgive me in advance if what I'm proposing is a bit Polyanna. But please stick with me on this for a few minutes.In preparation for my admission and move to the area, I scoured the ECF system for Los Angeles matters. Trying to get the lay of the land, as it were. I found that there are a ton of people filing their cases without the assistance of a lawyer. For the most part, these non-attorney petition preparers are not disclosed on the schedules or during the 341 meeting.
The US Trustee has not, to my knowledge, brought any actions against the non-attorney petition preparers ....even though the debtor often pays a large sum of money to the non-attorney.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.