Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

charset="windows-1251"
Lou's idea makes a lot of sense. A Lam Order, actually any Order, is
equivalent to a Judgment, so what you are doing with the application or
motion which Lou proposes is enforcing an existing Judgment. The quiet
title suggestion, however, may require a new adversary action so I would
stay away from that concept.
David A. Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
* Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal
Specialization.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Just a question, because I don't know much about recording laws. Can't you hold the Lam order until the discharge is entered and just attach the discharge as an exhibit to the Lam order when you record the Lam order?People re-record things all the time. My guess is you could also re-record old Lam orders and attach the discharge.
If we cannot order the two docs in this "package", maybe we get someone to talk to the judges and the clerk so they will put them together thusly, and certify them together.
dennis
wrote:

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Actually, the creditor has a statutory duty to release the lien upon discharge (exoneration) of the underlying indebtedness. My suggestion would be to serve the creditor with the Lam Motion (again) along with the discharge (again) and demand that the deed of trust be reconveyed. If the creditor will not do so, my further suggestion would be to file an ex parte application and ask the court to compel the execution of the reconveyance of deed of trust. The court should be asked to enter an order quieting title in furtherance of the Lam Order; basically the final step in obtaining the original Lam Order.
Lou

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

David:
I agree with you that recording certified copies of the Lam motion and discharge order should be sufficient. Unfortunately in the past when I have obtained the certified copy of the discharge order and tried to record it, ribbon and all, it is rejected. The Ventura County Recorder rejects it stating that the Recorder's Office only records documents which the State of California obligates them to record and that a bankruptcy discharge is not one of them. Yet the County Recorder's office has never raised an objection to recording certified copies of the notice of bankruptcy case commencement. I just shake my head at the lack of logical symmetry. When I have a Chapter 13 case discharge which had a Lam motion granted, I will optimistically try to record a certified copy of the discharge notice again with a copy of the certified order first and see if I can change the county recorder's mind.
Your idea to contact the creditor and contend that failure to release/reconvey the lien would be a violation of the discharge order is an option if we actually know who the creditor is, but if they do not cooperate and we are unclear of the identity of the holder in due course pursuing discharge stay violation sanctions could be a real mess.
Mark T. Jessee
Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
"A Debt Relief Agency"
50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
(805) 497-5868
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS E-MAIL IS MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OF
THE TRANSMISSION, AND THIS COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED TO BE PRIVILEGED BY
LAW. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY
US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Sun Mar 29 14:11 , 'David A. Tilem' sent:

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

charset="windows-1251"
Mark:
Your question is interesting. My first comment is that I am surprised the
County Recorder would refuse to record anything. Perhaps you have not been
getting a certified copy of the Discharge Order. Together with the Lam
Order, that should be sufficient. One other approach is to make demand on
the creditor and contend that failure to release/reconvey the lien would be
a violation of the discharge order.
David A. Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
Law Offices of David A. Tilem (a debt relief agency)
206 N. Jackson Street, #201, Glendale, CA 91206
Tel: 818-507-6000 Fax: 818-507-6800
* Bankruptcy specialist cert. by State Bar of CA Bd of Legal
Specialization.
Mark T. Jessee
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 6:52 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [cdcbaa] Effect of Recording Lam motion Order
The MCLE today brought the question to mind, what should we record after the
Lam motion to value is granted in the Chapter 13 cases extinguishing the
junior trust deed(s)? The order itself is premature to record until the
discharge is issued, but the order only says the lien is extinguished upon
completion of the plan and discharge. Recording a certified copy of the
Order without more appears insufficient because the Order references later
contingencies to occur for it to be effective. My experience has been that
the County recorders refuse to record discharge notices (at least in Ventura
County where almost all my cases are based). Thus recording a certified copy
of the discharge does not seem to be an option. Accordingly, what is the
best course of action? Seek a new order nunc pro tunc after the discharge
that unconditionally extinguishes the junior lien(s)? Any other ideas?
Mark Jessee
charset="windows-1251"
Message
Mark:

Your question is
interesting. My first comment is that I am surprised the County Recorder
would refuse to record anything. Perhaps you have not been getting acertified copy of the Discharge Order. Together with the Lam Order, that
should be sufficient. One other approach is to make demand on the creditor
and contend that failure to release/reconvey the lien would be a violation of
the discharge order.


David A.
Tilem
Certified Bankruptcy
Specialist*
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

The MCLE today brought the question to mind, what should we record after the Lam motion to value is granted in the Chapter 13 cases extinguishing the junior trust deed(s)? The order itself is premature to record until the discharge is issued, but the order only says the lien is extinguished upon completion of the plan and discharge. Recording a certified copy of the Order without more appears insufficient because the Order references later contingencies to occur for it to be effective. My experience has been that the County recorders refuse to record discharge notices (at least in Ventura County where almost all my cases are based). Thus recording a certified copy of the discharge does not seem to be an option. Accordingly, what is the best course of action? Seek a new order nunc pro tunc after the discharge that unconditionally extinguishes the junior lien(s)? Any other ideas?
Mark Jessee

The post was migrated from Yahoo.