Proper or improper depends on the dot. If dot has a number of years the debtor must use thr property as a residence, and that number has been exceeded, proper.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 1, 2012, at 6:55 PM, "Steven B. Lever" wrote:
> Dennis:
>
>
>
> Im unclear on your position because I asked whether it was proper or improper. So is it
>
>
>
> Proper
>
>
>
> Or
>
>
>
> Improper?
>
>
>
> Thank you, I really value your opinion on this.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
Dennis
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 2:29 PM
> To:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Does conversion of home to rental make it a business case --ergo making 707(b) not applicable
>
>
>
>
>
> That is the position I take.
>
>
>
> D
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:20 AM, "Steven B. Lever" wrote:
>
>
>
> Colleagues:
>
>
>
> I have a client who rented out their former residence and moved to a new residence they are renting. They will not pass the means test if Section 707(b) applies to them.
>
>
>
> If you include their mortgage on the residence-converted-to-rental, most of their debt is business debt if you consider the rental business or non-consumer. Yet they are both employed, not self-employed or in business. The unsecured debt is all consumer. So the case doesnt have a business flavor.
>
>
>
> I tried searching the list serve history and I only came up with 3 cases: In re Restea 76 BR 728, which is out of the 9th Circuit, and the seminal consumer/business cases In re Kelly 841 F2d 908 and In re Price 353 F3d 1135, which are close to the issue but do not resolve my issue.
>
>
>
> The operative language of 11 U.S.C. 707(b) defines "consumer debt" as "debt incurred by an individual primarily for a personal, family, or household purpose." The word incurred gives me the greatest pause. They originally incurred it for household purposes. Now theys incurred an ongoing concept or limited to its original purpose? It is the past participle of incur Become subject to (something unwelcome or unpleasant) as a result of one's own behavior or actions. They remain subject to it, but it was always capable of repurposing, as their own actions have demonstrated.
>
>
>
> What are your opinions as to whether filing this as a business/non-consumer case is proper or improper?
>
>
>
> Law Offices of Steven B. Lever
>
> >
>
> > Steven B. Lever
>
> >( Tel. (562) 436-5456 ext. 6470
>
> >( Fax (800) 360-5161
>
> >*
sblever@leverlaw.com
>
> >
www.leverlaw.com
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG -
www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2113/4844 - Release Date: 03/01/12
>
>
Proper or improper depends on the dot. If dot has a number of years the debtor must use thr property as a residence, and that number has been exceeded, proper. Sent from my iPhoneOn Mar 1, 2012, at 6:55 PM, "Steven B. Lever" <
sblever@leverlaw.com> wrote:
Im unclear on your position because I asked whether it was proper or improper. So is it Proper Or Improper? Thank you, I really value your opinion on this. From:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of DennisSent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 2:29 PMTo:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: [cdcbaa] Does conversion of home to rental make it a business case --ergo making 707(b) not applicable That is the position I take. DSent from my iPhoneOn Mar 1, 2012, at 10:20 AM, "Steven B. Lever" <
sblever@leverlaw.com> wrote: Colleagues: I have a client who rented out their former residence and moved to a new residence they are renting. They will not pass the means test if Section 707(b) applies to them. If you include their mortgage on the residence-converted-to-rental, most of their debt is business debt if you consider the rental business or non-consumer. Yet they are both employed, not self-employed or in business. The unsecured debt is all consumer. So the case doesnt have a business >I tried searching the list serve history and I only came up with 3 cases: In re Restea 76 BR 728, which is out of the 9th Circuit, and the seminal consumer/business cases In re Kelly 841 F2d 908 and In re Price 353 F3d 1135, which are close to the issue but do not resolve my issue. The operative language of 11 U.S.C. 707(b) defines "consumer debt" as "debt incurred by an individual primarily for a personal, family, or household purpose." The word incurred gives me the greatest pause. They originally incurred it for household purposes. Now theyve moved out with the hope it will give them profit at some point. Is incurred an ongoing concept or limited to its original purpose? It is the past participle of incur Become subject to (something unwelcome or unpleasant) as a result of one's own behavior or actions. They remain subject to it, but it was always capable of repurposing, as their own actions have demonstrated. What are your opinions as to whether filing this as a business/non-consumer case is proper or improper?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.