*
*
Thanks, Dennis ! and Lou !
We must all advocate for our clients when appropriate.
____________________
Robert K. Lee, Esq
State Bar Certified Specialist
[Bankruptcy Law]
3435 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1035
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Ph [888] 777-0839 Ext 505
Fax [888] 777-0849
WEBSITE
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Dennis McGoldrick wrote:
> **
>
>
> Peter's view is the majority view. We in CA are required to advocate for
> our clients, so we take the minority view when it is best for our clients.
> Lou Esbin has been our point man in the Central Distict for this issue. He
> convinced a few of the Valley judges that you must read the deed of trust
> to make a determination. Thanks Lou!
>
> d
>
> *From:* P L
> *To:* "
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
> *Sent:* Monday, March 5, 2012 11:12 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [cdcbaa] Does conversion of home to rental make it a
> business case --ergo making 707(b) not applicable
>
>
> The rental status of a former debtor's primary residence can
> affect 1322(b)(2). However, the characterization of the debt as consumer
> versus non-consumer is founded in the origination of the debt not the
> current use of the collateral.
>
> Peter M. Lively, JD, MBA
> *The Personal Financial Law Center*
> A-Bankruptcy-Attorney.com
> Culver City (310) 391-2400
>
> *From:* Robert Lee
> *To:*
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Monday, March 5, 2012 11:06 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [cdcbaa] Does conversion of home to rental make it a
> business case --ergo making 707(b) not applicable
>
>
> It is no longer the principal residence. Debtor had to rent it out
> because they could not afford it and was too far from business.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Giovanni Orantes wrote:
>
> **
>
> I say it cannot be done if the property is still the principal residence
> (and not an income producing property) regardless of how the funds were
> used.
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>
> **
>
> So, in this case, its a hybrid. The original first mortgage was
> purchase money. The line of credit was obtained much later after equity
> was built up. The clients actually used the line of credit for business
> purposes [can be proven through transfers and such]. What say you ? We
> would be attempting to do a 506 motion to value and strip away a big
> portion of the 2nd and at the very least, cure the first.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Leventhal Law Group, P.C. wrote:
>
> **
>
> Their has many many threads on this issue. It goes to the time the debt
> was incurred what was the purpose. I.e. business or personal use.
>
>
> Jonathan Leventhal, esq.
> Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
> 818-347-5800
>
> On Mar 5, 2012, at 10:31 AM, "Robert Lee" wrote:
>
>
> Does anyone have any case law or statutory authority on this ? I can't
> seem to find much on this issue.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Leventhal Law Group, P.C. wrote:
>
> **
>
> **
>
> No,
>
> Jonathan Leventhal, Esq.
> Leventhal Law Group, P.C.818-347-5800
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> To: "
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
> Sent: 03/05/2012 7:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Does conversion of home to rental make it a business case --ergo making 707(b) not applicable
>
>
>
>
> What if the debtor had to move out and rent out the home ? Does that
> convert it from a primary residence to a non-primary ?
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 7:43 PM, Dennis wrote:
>
> **
>
> If the property you are describing is the debtor's residence, no can do.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Robert Lee wrote:
>
>
> I have a similar case, but for purposes of trying to lienstrip and cram
> down a mortgage. Clients obtained a large 2nd home equity line of credit.
> It is almost as large as their 1st mortgage. The value is not low enough
> to do a LAM motion in a 13. The 2nd line was used primarily to fund their
> business operations. I am wondering if I can use this to justify a Chapter
> 11 lien strip and cram down and reamortize the loan [assuming other
> requirements of Ch 11 requirements are met]. Also, their business is in LA
> County and home is in SFV. I would think filing in SFV would be better.
> Any sage words of advice ?
>
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Dennis
easky1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> **
>
> That is the position I take.
>
> D
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 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 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 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?****
> ** **
> 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****
> ** **
>
>
>
>
> --
> Robert K. Lee
> State Bar Certified Specialist in Bankruptcy Law
> LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT K. LEE
> Managing Attorney
> 3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1035
> Los Angeles, CA 90010
> Ph 888-777-0839
> Fx 888-777-0849
>
www.robertklee.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Giovanni Orantes, Esq.
> Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
> 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1980
> Los Angeles, CA 90010
> Tel: (213) 389-4362
> Fax: (877) 789-5776
> e-mail:
go@gobklaw.com
> website:
www.gobklaw.com
>
> WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
>
> SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
> AND SANTA BARBARA.
>
> Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
> information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
> the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
> e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
>
> IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed
> by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> 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 herein.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Thanks, Dennis ! and Lou !We must all advocate for our clients when appropriate.
____________________Robert K. Lee, EsqState Bar Certified Specialist
[Bankruptcy Law]3435 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1035Los Angeles, CA 90010
Ph [888] 777-0839 Ext 505Fax [888] 777-0849WEBSITE
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Dennis McGoldrick <
easky1@yahoo.com> wrote:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.