Reaffirmation of Leases
Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 3:00 pm
Just for grins - see attached
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Dennis wrote:
> **
>
>
>
> Nick. I nominate you for the appeal. You have this issue wired
>
> D.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 7, 2012, at 4:11 PM, Nicholas Gebelt wrote:
>
>
>
> Dear Christian (I'm assuming thats the correct spelling you have two
> different spellings in your email. Please forgive me if I chose the wrong
> one.),****
>
> ** **
>
> Indicating the desire to assume a lease in Part B of the Statement of
> Intention is insufficient by itself to assume the lease. Otherwise,
> 365(p) would not be in the Code since 521(a)(2) would take care of the
> matter.****
>
> ** **
>
> Technically, 365(p), combined with 365(d), requires the assumption of
> a lease, rather than the reaffirmation of a lease. Otherwise, the
> automatic stay terminates with respect to the leased item (usually a motor
> vehicle) on the 61st day after the petition date. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Since 521(a)(6) requires that reaffirmation be done no later than 45
> days after the first 341(a) hearing, rather than 365(d)s 60 days after
> the filing date requirement, I view lease assumption and debt reaffirmation
> as distinct concepts. Indeed, on an intuitive level I think of
> reaffirmation as a secured purchase concept (even though a debtor can, in
> theory, reaffirm an unsecured debt though it is, admittedly, a bit
> unusual), and assumption as a lease concept.****
>
> ** **
>
> Some creditors, such as Toyota, ask the debtor to sign a one-page lease
> assumption agreement, while others, such as Honda, demand a full-blown
> reaffirmation agreement in order to assume the lease. I have gotten
> nowhere pointing out the difference in concepts to Honda. Their policy is
> that the debtor must sign a reaffirmation agreement to assume the lease.
> Therefore, if your client wants to assume a Honda lease, the better part of
> wisdom is to have them sign the reaffirmation agreement.****
>
> ** **
>
> As for Judge Donovans position, he is, after all, the final arbiter in
> the matter. Therefore, a debtor in his courtroom who wants to keep a
> leased vehicle will have to reaffirm, unless the lessor doesnt demand it.
> And who in his right mind is going to mount an appeal based on the somewhat
> arcane distinction between lease assumption and debt reaffirmation? ****
>
> ** **
>
> Best regards,****
>
> ** **
>
> Nick****
>
> ** **
>
> Nicholas Gebelt, Ph.D., J.D.****
>
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist****
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> 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/****
>
> ** **
>
> *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] *On Behalf
> Of *Dennis McGoldrick
> *Sent:* Friday, July 06, 2012 5:47 PM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [cdcbaa] Reaffirmation of Leases****
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
> 365p****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Christian Cooper
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 5, 2012 5:30 PM
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] Reaffirmation of Leases****
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
> Hi, all,****
>
> ****
>
> We are creating a checklist for volunteer attorneys who counsel debtors
> before reaffirmation hearings, and have a question regarding automobile
> leases. Are auto leases treated any differently in the reaffirmation
> process than car purchase agreements? ****
>
> ****
>
> We were under the impression that as long as the debtor stated an
> intention to assume a lease in Part B of the Statement of Intention, it was
> not necessary to reaffirm a lease. However, at last weeks reaffirmation
> hearings, Judge Donovan told a pro se debtor that, in order to keep the
> lease, she had to reaffirm it at the reaffirmation hearing.****
>
> ****
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Christain****
>
> ****
>
> *Christian Cooper*****
>
> *Staff Attorney*****
>
> ** **
>
> ****
>
>
>
Marvin Mann
2706 Artesia Blvd A
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
Just for grins - see attachedOn Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Dennis <easky1@yahoo.com> wrote:
Nick. I nominate you for the appeal. You have this issue wiredD.Sent from my iPhoneOn Jul 7, 2012, at 4:11 PM, Nicholas Gebelt <ngebelt@gebeltlaw.com> wrote:
Dear Christian (I'm assuming thats the correct spelling
The post was migrated from Yahoo.