Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

If a lender is concerned about collecting the income prior to foreclosure on
an income property with a lot of units, the usual method is to bring a
complaint for Judicial Foreclosure, and also bring a motion to appoint a
receiver until the foreclosure. The Receiver collects the money, makes any
repairs, pays utilities, etc. Unless there are more than 2 units, it isn't
financially feasible to do this for an institutional lender. The Receiver
charges their fees, they have a property manager, attorney, etc.
One of the many reasons for laws against "rent skimming" is that during
a previous recession somebody was actually teaching a seminar about how you
could buy a building, get a low money down mortgage, (or owner financing)
collect the rent, and not pay the mortgage. It was called a "cash flow
system". One of my clients was convinced it was a great idea and perfectly
legal. Of course he was the same guy who paid money so that his house was
considered a church and he would be exempt from property taxes and income
tax.
Margaret Norman
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:19:19 -0500
Jim Selth wrote:
> Our clients depend on us for advice both legal and practical, and
>almost all of my clients collecting rental income on a property in
>default or foreclosure need that money to live on. Both Lou and
>Mark are correct in what they say below, and Larry has accurately set
>forth in this thread the relevant state and federal law regarding
>rent skimming. Each of us needs to advise our clients what the
>applicable law is, whether they face any criminal penalties or civil
>liability for their actions, and what the likelihood is that their
>actions will result in adverse consequences if action is taken by the
>lender and/or Trustee.
>
> James R. Selth
> Weintraub & Selth, APC
> 12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1300
> Los Angeles, California 90025
> Telephone: (310) 207-1494
>Facsimile: (310) 442-0660
> E-Mail: jim@wsrlaw.net
>
> 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.
>
>Behalf Of californiadebtreliefagency
> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 5:00 PM
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: proceeds from rental
>
>
>
> But remember that Section 363 still applies in a Chapter 13 case to
>the use of cash collateral, and probably applies in a Chapter 7 case
>until the property is abandoned by the trustee, as those rents are
>property of the estate securing the claim of the lienholder.
>
> Lou Esbin
>
> --- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com,
>"Mark J. Markus" wrote:
>>
>>
>> I never realized there were statutes on rent skimming. I always just
>> assumed it was improper to use rents because of the rents (i.e. cash
>> collateral) clauses in the Deeds of Trust. Nonetheless, I have
>>clients
>> doing this all the time and I've never seen the creditor secured by
>>said
>> rents take any action (this almost always occurs in a foreclosure
>>scenario).
>>
>>
>> *************************
>> Mark J. Markus
>> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this
>>means at

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Our clients depend on us for advice both legal and practical, and almost all of my clients collecting rental income on a property in default or foreclosure need that money to live on. Both Lou and Mark are correct in what they say below, and Larry has accurately set forth in this thread the relevant state and federal law regarding rent skimming. Each of us needs to advise our clients what the applicable law is, whether they face any criminal penalties or civil liability for their actions, and what the likelihood is that their actions will result in adverse consequences if action is taken by the lender and/or Trustee.
James R. Selth
Weintraub & Selth, APC
12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1300
Los Angeles, California 90025
Telephone: (310) 207-1494
Facsimile: (310) 442-0660
E-Mail: jim@wsrlaw.net
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.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

But remember that Section 363 still applies in a Chapter 13 case to the use of cash collateral, and probably applies in a Chapter 7 case until the property is abandoned by the trustee, as those rents are property of the estate securing the claim of the lienholder.
Lou Esbin
>
>
> I never realized there were statutes on rent skimming. I always just
> assumed it was improper to use rents because of the rents (i.e. cash
> collateral) clauses in the Deeds of Trust. Nonetheless, I have clients
> doing this all the time and I've never seen the creditor secured by said> rents take any action (this almost always occurs in a foreclosure scenario).
>
>
> *************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
> (818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
> web: http://www.bklaw.com/
> This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this means at http://bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/2008/0 ... efinition/)
> ________________________________________________
> NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written 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 in this communication.
>
>
> On 1/16/2010 8:47 AM, Larry Webb wrote:
> >
> >
> > David,
> >
> > The concern is rent skimming. PC is current with her mortgage,
> > however she intends to use her next rental check to pay the costs and
> > fees for filing a chapter 7. She has owned the property for 27 years> > as her residence and only converted it to a rental after her divorce
> > because she could not afford the mortgage + HELOC. My research
> > indicates that using her next rental check for costs and fees should
> > not be problem.
> >
> > Ca Civ Code 890 ""/Rent skimming" means using revenue received from> > the rental of a parcel of residential real property at any time during> > the first year period after acquiring that property without first
> > applying the revenue or an equivalent amount to the payments due on
> > all mortgages and deeds of trust encumbering that property."/ She has> > owned the property for 27 years therefore 890 should not be a problem.
> >
> > Federal Law defines equity skimming 12 U.S.C. 1709-2 /"Whoever, with
> > intent to defraud, willfully engages in a pattern or practice of."
> > /1709-2 also says that /Nothing in this section shall apply to the
> > purchaser of only one such dwelling."/ Therefore the PC should not
> > liable for equity skimming however 1709-2 provides for fines and
> > imprisonment and I don't want to let the potential client go out on
> > thin ice.
> >
> > I guess the question is am I missing anything or am I over thinking
> > the obvious?
> >
> > Larry Webb
> > email Larry@...
> >
> >
> > Law Office of Larry Webb
> > 484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
> > Camarillo California 93010
> > 805 987 1400
> > Fax 805 987 2866
> >
> >
> > WARNING And Tax disclaimer
> > This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
> > 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is
> > confidential information and is intended only for the use of the
> > individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not> > the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> > dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> > strictly prohibited. It is for the use of the named addressees and may> > not be disclosed to anyone else without the express consent of the
> > originator. If you have received it in error you must not use,
> > disclose,copy, or rely on its contents and should destroy it
> > immediately. If you need any further information, please contact the
> > originator of this message.
> >
> > IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular
> > 230, any U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not> > intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient> > or any other taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties
> > that may be imposed on the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in> > promoting, marketing or recommending to another party a partnership or> > other entity, investment plan, arrangement or other transaction
> > addressed herein.
> >
> > *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On
> > Behalf Of *David A. Tilem
> > *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2010 6:29 PM
> > *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> > *Subject:* RE: [cdcbaa] proceeds from rental
> >
> > If she files with rent in hand, it is property of the estate. If she
> > deposits it and files, it is property of the estate. What is the
> > question here?
> >
> > *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.
> >
> > Business bankruptcy specialist cert. by Amer. Bd. of Certification
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On
> > Behalf Of *Larry Webb
> > *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2010 8:13 AM
> > *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> > *Subject:* [cdcbaa] proceeds from rental
> > *Importance:* High
> >
> > I am not sure if this questions was received by the list serve
> > yesterday, sorry if this is a duplicate.
> >
> > PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
> > mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has> > a rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent
> > payment if she is current on the mortgage?
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Larry Webb
> > email Larry@...
> >
> >
> > Law Office of Larry Webb
> > 484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
> > Camarillo California 93010
> > 805 987 1400
> > Fax 805 987 2866
> >
> >
> > WARNING And Tax disclaimer
> > This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
> > 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is
> > confidential information and is intended only for the use of the
> > individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not> > the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> > dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> > strictly prohibited. It is for the use of the named addressees and may> > not be disclosed to anyone else without the express consent of the
> > originator. If you have received it in error you must not use,
> > disclose,copy, or rely on its contents and should destroy it
> > immediately. If you need any further information, please contact the
> > originator of this message.
> >
> > IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular
> > 230, any U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not> > intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient> > or any other taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties
> > that may be imposed on the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in> > promoting, marketing or recommending to another party a partnership or> > other entity, investment plan, arrangement or other transaction
> > addressed herein.
> >
> > PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
> > mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has> > a rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent
> > payment if she is current on the mortgage?
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I never realized there were statutes on rent skimming. I always just
assumed it was improper to use rents because of the rents (i.e. cash
collateral) clauses in the Deeds of Trust. Nonetheless, I have clients
doing this all the time and I've never seen the creditor secured by said
rents take any action (this almost always occurs in a foreclosure scenario).
*************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
Studio City, CA 91604-2652
(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this means at http://bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/2008/0 ... efinition/)
________________________________________________
NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the law office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written 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 in this communication.
On 1/16/2010 8:47 AM, Larry Webb wrote:
>
>
> David,
>
> The concern is rent skimming. PC is current with her mortgage,
> however she intends to use her next rental check to pay the costs and
> fees for filing a chapter 7. She has owned the property for 27 years
> as her residence and only converted it to a rental after her divorce
> because she could not afford the mortgage + HELOC. My research
> indicates that using her next rental check for costs and fees should
> not be problem.
>
> Ca Civ Code 890 "/Rent skimming" means using revenue received from
> the rental of a parcel of residential real property at any time during
> the first year period after acquiring that property without first
> applying the revenue or an equivalent amount to the payments due on
> all mortgages and deeds of trust encumbering that property./ She has
> owned the property for 27 years therefore 890 should not be a problem.
>
> Federal Law defines equity skimming 12 U.S.C. 1709-2 /Whoever, with
> intent to defraud, willfully engages in a pattern or practice of.
> /1709-2 also says that /Nothing in this section shall apply to the
> purchaser of only one such dwelling./ Therefore the PC should not
> liable for equity skimming however 1709-2 provides for fines and
> imprisonment and I dont want to let the potential client go out on
> thin ice.
>
> I guess the question is am I missing anything or am I over thinking
> the obvious?
>
> Larry Webb
> email Larry@Webbklaw.com
>
>
> Law Office of Larry Webb
> 484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
> Camarillo California 93010
> 805 987 1400
> Fax 805 987 2866
>
>
> WARNING And Tax disclaimer
> This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
> 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is
> confidential information and is intended only for the use of the
> individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not
> the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> strictly prohibited. It is for the use of the named addressees and may
> not be disclosed to anyone else without the express consent of the
> originator. If you have received it in error you must not use,
> disclose,copy, or rely on its contents and should destroy it
> immediately. If you need any further information, please contact the
> originator of this message.
>
> IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular
> 230, any U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not
> intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient
> or any other taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties
> that may be imposed on the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in
> promoting, marketing or recommending to another party a partnership or
> other entity, investment plan, arrangement or other transaction
> addressed herein.
>
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *David A. Tilem
> *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2010 6:29 PM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [cdcbaa] proceeds from rental
>
> If she files with rent in hand, it is property of the estate. If she
> deposits it and files, it is property of the estate. What is the
> question here?
>
> *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.
>
> Business bankruptcy specialist cert. by Amer. Bd. of Certification
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Larry Webb
> *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2010 8:13 AM
> *To:* cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* [cdcbaa] proceeds from rental
> *Importance:* High
>
> I am not sure if this questions was received by the list serve
> yesterday, sorry if this is a duplicate.
>
> PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
> mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has
> a rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent
> payment if she is current on the mortgage?
>
> Thank you
>
> Larry Webb
> email Larry@Webbklaw.com
>
>
> Law Office of Larry Webb
> 484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
> Camarillo California 93010
> 805 987 1400
> Fax 805 987 2866
>
>
> WARNING And Tax disclaimer
> This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
> 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is
> confidential information and is intended only for the use of the
> individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not
> the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> strictly prohibited. It is for the use of the named addressees and may
> not be disclosed to anyone else without the express consent of the
> originator. If you have received it in error you must not use,
> disclose,copy, or rely on its contents and should destroy it
> immediately. If you need any further information, please contact the
> originator of this message.
>
> IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular
> 230, any U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not
> intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient
> or any other taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties
> that may be imposed on the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in
> promoting, marketing or recommending to another party a partnership or
> other entity, investment plan, arrangement or other transaction
> addressed herein.
>
> PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
> mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has
> a rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent
> payment if she is current on the mortgage?
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
>

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Larry:
you are overthinking. I had a client go to Federal prision for 5 years under the federal skimming law. The client took money from some 40 unit apartments which were purchasedwhile in a foreclosure.
He filed bk, and was also charged with bankruptcy crimes under 18 usc 152. off ofthe bk crimes charges, but got 5 years for theskimming.Grandma with one place is not the subject of these prosecutions.
dennis

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

David,
The concern is rent skimming. PC is current with her mortgage, however she
intends to use her next rental check to pay the costs and fees for filing a
chapter 7. She has owned the property for 27 years as her residence and
only converted it to a rental after her divorce because she could not afford
the mortgage + HELOC. My research indicates that using her next rental
check for costs and fees should not be problem.
Ca Civ Code 890 "Rent skimming" means using revenue received from the
rental of a parcel of residential real property at any time during the first
year period after acquiring that property without first applying the revenue
or an equivalent amount to the payments due on all mortgages and deeds of
trust encumbering that property. She has owned the property for 27 years
therefore 890 should not be a problem.
Federal Law defines equity skimming 12 U.S.C. 1709-2 Whoever, with intent
to defraud, willfully engages in a pattern or practice of. 1709-2 also
says that Nothing in this section shall apply to the purchaser of only one
such dwelling. Therefore the PC should not liable for equity skimming
however 1709-2 provides for fines and imprisonment and I dont want to let
the potential client go out on thin ice.
I guess the question is am I missing anything or am I over thinking the
obvious?
Larry Webb
email Larry@Webbklaw.com
Law Office of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
Camarillo California 93010
805 987 1400
Fax 805 987 2866
WARNING And Tax disclaimer
This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18
U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is
confidential information and is intended only for the use of the individual
or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. It is for the use of
the named addressees and may not be disclosed to anyone else without the
express consent of the originator. If you have received it in error you must
not use, disclose,copy, or rely on its contents and should destroy it
immediately. If you need any further information, please contact the
originator of this message.
IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular 230, any
U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not intended or
written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient or any other
taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed
on the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party a partnership or other entity, investment
plan, arrangement or other transaction addressed herein.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

If she files with rent in hand, it is property of the estate. If she
deposits it and files, it is property of the estate. What is the question
here?
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.
Larry Webb
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 8:13 AM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [cdcbaa] proceeds from rental
Importance: High
I am not sure if this questions was received by the list serve yesterday,
sorry if this is a duplicate.
PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has a
rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent payment if
she is current on the mortgage?
Thank you
Larry Webb
email Larry@Webbklaw.com
Law Office of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
Camarillo California 93010
805 987 1400
Fax 805 987 2866
WARNING And Tax disclaimer
This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18
U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is
confidential information and is intended only for the use of the individual
or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. It is for the use of
the named addressees and may not be disclosed to anyone else without the
express consent of the originator. If you have received it in error you must
not use, disclose,copy, or rely on its contents and should destroy it
immediately. If you need any further information, please contact the
originator of this message.
IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular 230, any
U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not intended or
written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient or any other
taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed
on the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party a partnership or other entity, investment
plan, arrangement or other transaction addressed herein.
PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has a
rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent payment if
she is current on the mortgage?
Thank you
Message
If she files with rent in
hand, it is property of the estate. If she deposits it and files, it is
property of the estate. What is the question here?


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

I am not sure if this questions was received by the list serve yesterday,
sorry if this is a duplicate.
PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has a
rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent payment if
she is current on the mortgage?
Thank you
Larry Webb
email Larry@Webbklaw.com
Law Office of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
Camarillo California 93010
805 987 1400
Fax 805 987 2866
WARNING And Tax disclaimer
This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18
U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is
confidential information and is intended only for the use of the individual
or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. It is for the use of
the named addressees and may not be disclosed to anyone else without the
express consent of the originator. If you have received it in error you must
not use, disclose,copy, or rely on its contents and should destroy it
immediately. If you need any further information, please contact the
originator of this message.
IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular 230, any
U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not intended or
written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient or any other
taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed
on the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party a partnership or other entity, investment
plan, arrangement or other transaction addressed herein.
PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it out to make the
mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file ch7 and has a
rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate the rent payment if
she is current on the mortgage?
Thank you
I am not sure if this questions was received by the list
serve yesterday, sorry if this is a duplicate.

PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it
out to make the mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file
ch7 and has a rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate
the rent payment if she is current on the mortgage?

Thank you




Larry Webb
email Larry@Webbklaw.com
Law Office of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ave. Suite 43
Camarillo California 93010
805 987 1400
Fax 805 987 2866
WARNING And Tax disclaimer
This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C.
l
information and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named
above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. It is for the use of the named addressees
and may not be disclosed to anyone else without the express consent of the
originator. If you have received it in error you must not use, disclose,copy,
or rely on its contents and should destroy it immediately. If you need any
further information, please contact the originator of this message.
IRS Circular 230 Disclaimer: To ensure compliance with IRS Circular 230, any
U.S. federal tax advice provided in this communication is not intended or
written to be used, and it cannot be used by the recipient or any other
taxpayer (i) for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on
the recipient or any other taxpayer, or (ii) in promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party a partnership or other entity, investment plan,
arrangement or other transaction addressed herein.



PC moved out of her primary residence is renting it
out to make the mortgage. PC is current in the mortgage, is ready to file
ch7 and has a rent check in hand. Is the PC obligated to segregate
the rent payment if she is current on the mortgage?

Thank you


The post was migrated from Yahoo.