Humphries - fees and noncompliance with 11 USC 528
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2011 5:52 pm
Humphries: This post-BAPCPA case is the first one that I know of
interpreting the "Debt Relief Agency" obligations surrounding consultations.
It stirred up a lot of discussion and angst at NACBA, and all fees were
disallowed for a lot of work based on a very harsh reading of the code.
Read the argument and then the ruling. This ruling is only one judge, and
it's not our district, but it's not as though judges always interpret the
court in the favor of debtors' counsel.
Give the disclosures in 527. Get them signed. Give a contract within 5 days
of giving legal advice per 11 USC 528. Sign it.
I hope that helps.
That is all.
Hale
Humphries: This
post-BAPCPA case is the first one that I know of interpreting the "Debt Relief
Agency" obligations surrounding consultations. It stirred up a lot of discussion
and angst at NACBA, and all fees were disallowed for a lot of work based on a
very harsh reading of the code. Read the argument and then the ruling.
This ruling is only one judge, and it's not our district, but it's not as though
judges always interpret the court in the favor of debtors' counsel.
Give the disclosures
in 527. Get them signed. Give a contract within 5 days of giving legal
advice per 11 USC 528. Sign it.
I hope that
helps.
That is
all.
Hale
name="humphries-528.pdf"
filename="humphries-528.pdf"
name="humphries argument.pdf"
filename="humphries argument.pdf"
The post was migrated from Yahoo.