I knew Nick had something up his sleeve, I just couldn't figure out what it
was! Very clever.
Some concerns of mine though:
-If the Plan has been confirmed, then how do you retroactively reject the
contract?
-If the Debtor received some kind of product, then what are the
implications of a rejection of an "executory" contract of this nature. The
fact pattern I am thinking of is Debtor was given an iPhone 6 for $200 and
filed for Chapter 13 the next day. In other words, does there need to be an
analysis of the underlying contract to determine whether this is a mixed
service/goods contract and the implications of rejection?
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian, Esq. *AVANESIAN LAW FIRM
101 N. Brand Blvd., PH 1920
Glendale, California 91203
Tel: 818.276.2477 Fax: 818.208.4550
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Nicholas Gebelt
ngebelt@gebeltlaw.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> Dear John,
>
>
>
> Once you use the nuclear option, your client can get a new contract.
> According to the FCC, cell phone numbers are portable (
>
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/portability-k ... -providers).
> Therefore, even if the new contract is with someone other than Verizon,
> your client can keep the numbers.
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *Nicholas Gebelt*
>
>
>
> Nicholas Gebelt, Ph.D., J.D.
>
> Attorney at Law
>
> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist
>
>
>
> [image: Description: Description: Description:
> cid:
image003.jpg@01CC076B.B14D73C0]
>
>
>
> Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt
>
> 15150 Hornell Street
>
> Whittier, CA 90604
>
> Phone: 562.777.9159
>
> FAX: 562.946.1365
>
> Email:
ngebelt@goodbye2debt.com;
ngebelt@gebeltlaw.com
>
> Web:
www.goodbye2debt.com
>
> Blog:
www.southerncaliforniabankruptcylawblog.com/
>
>
>
> *Important notice required by 11 U.S.C. 528:* We are a debt relief
> agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
>
>
>
> *Confidentiality Note*: This e-mail is intended only for the person or
> entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure.
> Dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail or the information
> herein by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an employee or agent
> responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
> immediately at 562.777.9159 or e-mail
info@gebeltlaw.com and destroy the
> original message and all copies.
>
>
>
> *Representation Note*: If you have not signed a contract of
> representation, the Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt do not represent you,
> and this email does not contain any legal advice for you.
>
>
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: *In order to comply with the 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.
>
>
>
> *From:*
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, February 02, 2015 8:37 AM
> *To:*
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [cdcbaa] Canceling Verizon lines [1 Attachment]
>
>
>
>
>
> *[Attachment(s) from John Faucher included
> below]*
>
> Thanks, Nick.
>
> Rejecting the lease is all-or-nothing. Aside from using this nuclear
> option as a way to negotiate with Verizon, I don't see any way to force
> Verizon to continue providing service to three out of five lines without
> paying their cancelation fee.
>
> But I am impaired by a cold today. Am I missing something?
>
> - John
>
>
>
> On Sunday, February 1, 2015 9:28 PM, "Nicholas Gebelt
>
ngebelt@gebeltlaw.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear John,
>
>
>
> If the plan hasnt been confirmed, put a provision in section V.A. to
> reject the cell phone contract. If the plan has already been confirmed,
> file a motion to modify the plan to reject the contract.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *Nicholas Gebelt*
>
>
>
> Nicholas Gebelt, Ph.D., J.D.
>
> Attorney at Law
>
> Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist
>
>
>
> [image: Description: Description: Description:
> cid:
image003.jpg@01CC076B.B14D73C0]
>
>
>
> Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt
>
> 15150 Hornell Street
>
> Whittier, CA 90604
>
> Phone: 562.777.9159
>
> FAX: 562.946.1365
>
> Email:
ngebelt@goodbye2debt.com;
ngebelt@gebeltlaw.com
>
> Web:
www.goodbye2debt.com
>
> Blog:
www.southerncaliforniabankruptcylawblog.com/
>
>
>
> *Important notice required by 11 U.S.C. 528:* We are a debt relief
> agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.
>
>
>
> *Confidentiality Note*: This e-mail is intended only for the person or
> entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure.
> Dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail or the information
> herein by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an employee or agent
> responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
> immediately at 562.777.9159 or e-mail
info@gebeltlaw.com and destroy the
> original message and all copies.
>
>
>
> *Representation Note*: If you have not signed a contract of
> representation, the Law Offices of Nicholas Gebelt do not represent you,
> and this email does not contain any legal advice for you.
>
>
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: *In order to comply with the 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.
>
>
>
> *From:*
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 01, 2015 7:47 PM
> *To:* Cdcbaa Yahoo Listserv
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Canceling Verizon lines
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello All:
>
> Chapter 13 client has five lines on his Verizon cell phone plan. He wants
> to drop two of the lines to reduce expenses. Verizon wants to charge him
> $300 to do so, defeating the purpose of dropping the lines. Can we use the
> chapter 13 to force Verizon to drop the lines for free, and if so, how?
>
> - John D. Faucher
>
> 818/889-8080
>
>
>
>
>
I knew Nick had something up his sleeve, I just couldn't figure out what it was! Very clever.Some concerns of mine though:-If the Plan has been confirmed, then how do you retroactively reject the contract?-If the Debtor received some kind of product, then what are the implications of a rejection of an "executory" contract of this nature. The fact pattern I am thinking of is Debtor was given an iPhone 6 for $200 and filed for Chapter 13 the next day. In other words, does there need to be an analysis of the underlying contract to determine whether this is a mixed service/goods contract and the implications of rejection?
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
