Thank you. I will look up the case.
Sent from my iPhone: Nathan Berneman
On Sep 13, 2013, at 10:46 AM, wrote:
> I'm not sure the outcome, but this issue was recently before Judge Mund. Her tentative is reproduced below:
>
> Tuesday, June 04, 2013
>
> 10:00 AM
>
> 1:11-11123 Alfonso Rios and Eloise Rios Chapter 7
>
> #49.00 Motion by Debtor to Reopen Chapter 7 Case
>
> Docket 16
>
> - NONE LISTED -
>
> Courtroom Deputy:
>
> This chapter 7 no asset case was filed on 1/28/11. Discharge was entered on
>
> 4/29/11 and the case was closed on 5/29/11. No reaffirmation agreements
>
> were filed prior to that time. The schedules show that at the time of filing the
>
> petition the Debtors owned a single family residence at 13618 Gain St.,
>
> Pacoima that was worth $267,000 and that the liens as to that property were
>
> as follows:
>
> 1st TD to Wells Fargo with $161,000 owing
>
> 2d TD to Bank of America with $117,000 owing
>
> 3d TD to Bank of America with $10,000 owing
>
> On May 13, 2013 Debtors filed this motion to reopen "for the purposes of>
> permitting Debtors to refinance with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Creditor") and
>
> thereafter to file a reaffirmation agreement with the court." [doc. 16, 1:25-27]
>
> The motion goes on to state that the "Debtors have been informed by the
>
> Creditor that the Creditor will not refinance Debtors' first deed of trust due to
>
> the fact that Debtors' bankruptcy case is now closed and the original deed of
>
> trust was no reaffirmed. Debtors must reaffirm their original deed of trust
>
> through the bankruptcy court before Creditor would consider refinancing
>
> Debtors' first deed of trust." [doc. 16, 3:19-23] Debtors also note that "[w]
>
> ithout the case being reopened, Debtors will have no ability to refinance their
>
> Real Property, primary residence. This will have an adverse effect on their
>
> ability to re-establish their creditor and finances post bankruptcy
>
> discharge." [doc. 16, 4:24-27, emphasis in the original]
>
> proposed ruling
>
> The initial issue concerns why Wells Fargo is apparently insisting that the
>
> Debtor reaffirm the first trust deed before it will refinance. Is this merely sothat it is comfortable that the refinance [or possibly the loan modification] will
>
> not be seen as a violation of the discharge injunction? If so, the Court is
>
> willing to enter an order to that effect.
>
> Or is it so that Wells Fargo will have additional rights under the refinanced
>
> loan than it would otherwise have due to the effect of the discharge on the
>
> original/current loan?
>
> I have no declaration or other evidence from Wells Fargo as to its purpose. If
>
> the Debtor can provide such a declaration, I will consider it. Otherwise, the
>
> Debtor is to provide me with the name, email address, and phone number of>
> the person at Wells Fargo who can be contacted at the time of the hearing. I
>
> strongly suggest that Wells Fargo be asked to arrange that this person be in
>
> higher management with the knowledge and authority to deal with this or that
>
> s/he be an attorney for Wells Fargo who is fully cognizant of the details of this
>
> loan and the purpose for which the reaffirmation agreement is being
>
> requested.
>
>
>
> - Casey Nelson
>
>
>
> --- In
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
>
> This is happening all the time now withal banks. I am getting a lot of emails and calls from clients about this.
>
> Sent from my Stella Havkin's iPad
>
> On Sep 12, 2013, at 10:18 PM, Nathan Berneman wrote:
>
>>
>> I have a past client who left me a message today about reaffirming her mortgage loans on both her properties. Debtor received her Discharge in Chapter 7 in 2012. The message stated that she was told by her mortgage companies that in order to get Assistance for a program for a loan modification she needs to Reaffirm her mortgage loans since her husband is now unemployed. (The loans are with Seterus, BofA and Nationstar ).
>>
>> 1. Since the case is discharged, this can't happen.
>> 2. The Judge's don't like to reaffirm mortgage loans while the case is even active unless there was a significant benefit.
>>
>> Has anyone had this issue come up and what did you tell your clients?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Nate Berneman
>
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.