Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

Mark,
My understanding of the procedure is also that an Original Fee App must be filed. The RARA just allows the so-called "no-look" fee to be approved without a detailed fee statement. There was always a "no-look" fee, but the fee was increased when the RARA was introduced. (I agree with you, though--it does seem to be redundant).
You can always set your Fee Apps and motions for hearing to side-step the Trustee's comments. However, since you are dealing with Sylvia, I am guessing who the judge is, and if I'm right, you might as well just file the OFA and then re-submit your SFA so that you'll get paid sometime before the end of the year.
Melissa Besecker
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Mark,
My understanding of the procedure is also that an Original Fee App must be filed. The RARA just allows the so-called "no-look" fee to be approved without a detailed fee statement. There was always a "no-look" fee, but the fee was increased when the RARA was introduced. (I agree with you, though--it does seem to be redundant).
You can always set your Fee Apps and motions for hearing to side-step the Trustee's comments. However, since you are dealing with Sylvia, I am guessing who the judge is, and if I'm right, you might as well just file the OFA and then re-submit your SFA so that you'll get paid sometime before the end of the year.
Melissa Besecker__________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I think you are 100% correct. After discussing this at length with Renee Sawyer, apparently I had filed my case before their new policy of allowing the confirmation order to contain interlineation allowing the fees to be approved. Personally, I'm against attorneys having to file fee applications for anything, but that's another story. Thanks everyone for your input and listening to my rants.
***********************************************
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)
e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.com
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
************************************************
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 (818)
509-1173 or e-mail us at bklawr@bklaw.com and destroy the
original message and all copies.
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 11:28 AM
Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Re: Ch. 13 Supp. Fee Apps Bounced
My understanding of how this works is in line with M.Jessee, i.e., that with RARA, "detailed" fee app not necessary (no time/cost entries). However, a court order in some form approving fees is necessary. There has been some confusion, however, as to the practice for how to obtain that order, i.e., whether by separate "non-detailed" fee application or by clause approving fees in confirmation order, as it varies somewhat by trustee and division.
While you shouldn't quote me on this, especially since the procedures have been evolving over time following the RARA, I believe that in L.A. Kathy Dockery and Nancy Curry prefer not to process the initial fee applications where the RARA is filed. I think Curry, e.g., does not process them if case confirmed (places clause in conf. order), although she processes them if case is to be dismissed (so as to ensure attorneys get paid). Dockery has recently started going farther than that, trying not to process initial fee apps at all, putting clauses in confirmation order or dismissal orders approving the fees. In S.A. and R.V., no initial fee apps at all, meaning attorneys do not get paid if plan not confirmed.
As for S.V., I had thought that Rojas' policy was to give attorneys the option of a fee app or waiting until confirmation where a clause would be put in confirmation order (risky for attorneys if case dismissed pre-conf.).
As to your situation, it sounds like the problem may really be that you didn't do an initial fee app in your RARA case, perhaps believing it wasn't needed (you say below that you did the abbreviated apps for years prior to RARA), and I'm guessing that your case may have been filed before Rojas started placing clauses approving such fees in the confirmation order. If this is the case, there is no order out there approving your initial fees and that may be the true reason why she's asking for a fee app now. As to the rationale you state she gave you, that the obligation to file the initial fee app is triggered by the fact you filed a supp fee app, I think it's more likely that upon the filing of the supp fee app her office reviewed the file and realized you had never filed an initial fee app, and that's how the two are tied in (maybe nobody previously noticed the missing original fee app because you got paid in full pre-petition).
I know my answer assumes a few things about your case, so if my assumptions are wrong, then I have no freakin' idea what happened!!
Joseph E. Caceres, Esq.
Caceres & Shamash, LLP
8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1010
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2409
Tel: (323) 852-1600 x 102
Fax: (323) 852-9009
E-Mail: jec@locs.com
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 9:42 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Ch. 13 Supp. Fee Apps Bounced
Not true. I did the abbreviated applications for years prior to RARA.
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:10 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: Ch. 13 Supp. Fee Apps Bounced
I agree it is a bueaurocratic pain in the backside. However, I
think the answer is that the Court must actually approve the amount
of all attorney fees. RARA provides the attorney's with consistancy
in compensation throughout the district for basic Chapter 13 cases. I never interpreted it to remove the necessity for Court approval of
attorney fees. Having heard at least the SV Division Judges discuss
the issues a few months back, they seem to take the position that an
order approving RARA fees is necessary. I do not believe merely
including attorney fees in the plan is enough.
With RARA the abrevieated fee application and order is all that is
required and the application will be approved. Without it, or if
more than $1,000 additional fees, the full formal application
following US Trustee guidelines is required.
Mark Jesseee
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

My understanding of how this works is in line with M.Jessee, i.e., that
with RARA, "detailed" fee app not necessary (no time/cost entries).
However, a court order in some form approving fees is necessary. There
has been some confusion, however, as to the practice for how to obtain
that order, i.e., whether by separate "non-detailed" fee application or
by clause approving fees in confirmation order, as it varies somewhat by
trustee and division.

While you shouldn't quote me on this, especially since the procedures
have been evolving over time following the RARA, I believe that in L.A.
Kathy Dockery and Nancy Curry prefer not to process the initial fee
applications where the RARA is filed. I think Curry, e.g., does not
process them if case confirmed (places clause in conf. order), although
she processes them if case is to be dismissed (so as to ensure attorneys
get paid). Dockery has recently started going farther than that, trying
not to process initial fee apps at all, putting clauses in confirmation
order or dismissal orders approving the fees. In S.A. and R.V., no
initial fee apps at all, meaning attorneys do not get paid if plan not
confirmed.

As for S.V., I had thought that Rojas' policy was to give attorneys the
option of a fee app or waiting until confirmation where a clause would
be put in confirmation order (risky for attorneys if case dismissed
pre-conf.).

As to your situation, it sounds like the problem may really be that you
didn't do an initial fee app in your RARA case, perhaps believing it
wasn't needed (you say below that you did the abbreviated apps for years
prior to RARA), and I'm guessing that your case may have been filed
before Rojas started placing clauses approving such fees in the
confirmation order. If this is the case, there is no order out there
approving your initial fees and that may be the true reason why she's
asking for a fee app now. As to the rationale you state she gave you,
that the obligation to file the initial fee app is triggered by the fact
you filed a supp fee app, I think it's more likely that upon the filing
of the supp fee app her office reviewed the file and realized you had
never filed an initial fee app, and that's how the two are tied in
(maybe nobody previously noticed the missing original fee app because
you got paid in full pre-petition).

I know my answer assumes a few things about your case, so if my
assumptions are wrong, then I have no freakin' idea what happened!!



Joseph E. Caceres, Esq.
Caceres & Shamash, LLP
8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1010
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2409
Tel: (323) 852-1600 x 102
Fax: (323) 852-9009
E-Mail: jec@locs.com
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 9:42 PM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Ch. 13 Supp. Fee Apps Bounced

Not true. I did the abbreviated applications for years prior to RARA.


To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:10 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: Ch. 13 Supp. Fee Apps Bounced

I agree it is a bueaurocratic pain in the backside. However, I
think the answer is that the Court must actually approve the amount
of all attorney fees. RARA provides the attorney's with consistancy
in compensation throughout the district for basic Chapter 13 cases.
I never interpreted it to remove the necessity for Court approval of
attorney fees. Having heard at least the SV Division Judges discuss
the issues a few months back, they seem to take the position that an
order approving RARA fees is necessary. I do not believe merely
including attorney fees in the plan is enough.
With RARA the abrevieated fee application and order is all that is
required and the application will be approved. Without it, or if
more than $1,000 additional fees, the full formal application
following US Trustee guidelines is required.
Mark Jesseee
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT


The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Not true. I did the abbreviated applications for years prior to RARA.
----- Original Message -----
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:10 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: Ch. 13 Supp. Fee Apps Bounced
I agree it is a bueaurocratic pain in the backside. However, I
think the answer is that the Court must actually approve the amount
of all attorney fees. RARA provides the attorney's with consistancy
in compensation throughout the district for basic Chapter 13 cases.
I never interpreted it to remove the necessity for Court approval of
attorney fees. Having heard at least the SV Division Judges discuss
the issues a few months back, they seem to take the position that an
order approving RARA fees is necessary. I do not believe merely
including attorney fees in the plan is enough.
With RARA the abrevieated fee application and order is all that is
required and the application will be approved. Without it, or if
more than $1,000 additional fees, the full formal application
following US Trustee guidelines is required.
Mark Jesseee
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Not true. I did the abbreviated applications
for years prior to RARA.


----- Original Message -----
From:
marktjessee
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:10
PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] Re: Ch. 13 Supp. Fee
Apps Bounced
I agree it is a bueaurocratic pain in the backside.
However, I think the answer is that the Court must actually approve the
amount of all attorney fees. RARA provides the attorney's with consistancy in compensation throughout the district for basic Chapter 13
cases. I never interpreted it to remove the necessity for Court approval of attorney fees. Having heard at least the SV Division
Judges discuss the issues a few months back, they seem to take the
position that an order approving RARA fees is necessary. I do not
believe merely including attorney fees in the plan is enough.With
RARA the abrevieated fee application and order is all that is required and
the application will be approved. Without it, or if more than $1,000
additional fees, the full formal application following US Trustee
guidelines is required.Mark Jesseee

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I agree it is a bueaurocratic pain in the backside. However, I
think the answer is that the Court must actually approve the amount
of all attorney fees. RARA provides the attorney's with consistancy
in compensation throughout the district for basic Chapter 13 cases.
I never interpreted it to remove the necessity for Court approval of
attorney fees. Having heard at least the SV Division Judges discuss
the issues a few months back, they seem to take the position that an
order approving RARA fees is necessary. I do not believe merely
including attorney fees in the plan is enough.
With RARA the abrevieated fee application and order is all that is
required and the application will be approved. Without it, or if
more than $1,000 additional fees, the full formal application
following US Trustee guidelines is required.
Mark Jesseee

The post was migrated from Yahoo.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission and any documents, files,
or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential
information from the LAW OFFICES OF VERNON L. ELLICOTT that is legally
privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible
for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you
received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by reply
e-mail, or by telephone at (805) 446-6262, and destroy the original
transmission and its attachments and all copies of any kind, without reading
them or saving them in any way. Thank you.
I had the same thing happen and I think they are wrong! I completed the
RARA and listed the amount of attorney's fees remaining in the plan. They
refuse to pay me and insist on a fee application. Why should we have to
file an initial fee application if we do the RARA and list remaining fees in
the plan?
Vernon L. Ellicott, Esq.
Law Offices of Vernon L. Ellicott
920 Hampshire Road, Suite 25
Westlake Village, CA 91361
(805) 446-6262 phone
(805) 446-6264 fax
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 10:50 AM
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [cdcbaa] Ch. 13 Supp. Fee Apps Bounced
I just had a supp. fee app bounced by Rojas' office for the reason that I
hadn't filed an initial fee app for my $2,500 that was paid pre-petition. I
called up and explained to Sylvia Grezel that I had duly executed and filed
the RARA agreement which stated (as did my Attorney Compensation Statement)
that I was paid this $2,500.
Clearly, we are not required to do a fee app if the RARA is used. LBR
3015-1 (u)(1): "If the RARA form is signed by the attorney and the debtor,
filed, and served on the responsible chapter 13 trustee in any case, the
fees outlined therein may be approved without further detailed fee
application or hearing..."
Rojas is taking the position that that is fine, unless you file a
supplemental fee application, which then requires you go back and do an
original fee application.
Does this make any sense to anyone? What the heck is the purpose of using
the RARA form then??
***********************************************
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)
e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.com
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
************************************************
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 (818)
509-1173 or e-mail us at bklawr@bklaw.com and destroy the
original message and all copies.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cdcbaa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cdcbaa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission and any
documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain
confidential information from the LAW OFFICES OF VERNON L. ELLICOTT that islegally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the informationcontained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you
received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by replye-mail, or by telephone at (805) 446-6262, and destroy the original transmission
and its attachments and all copies of any kind, without reading them or saving
them in any way. Thank you.

I had the same
thing happen and I think they are wrong! I completed the RARA and listed
the amount of attorney's fees remaining in the plan. They refuse to pay me
and insist on a fee application. Why should we have to file an initial fee
application if we do the RARA and list remaining fees in the
plan?Vernon L. Ellicott, Esq.Law
Offices of Vernon L. Ellicott920 Hampshire Road, Suite 25Westlake
Village, CA 91361(805) 446-6262 phone(805) 446-6264
fax
-----Original Message-----From: Mark J. Markus
[mailto:bklawr@bklaw.com]Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 10:50
AMTo: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.comSubject: [cdcbaa] Ch. 13
Supp. Fee Apps Bounced
I just had a supp. fee app bounced by Rojas'
office for the reason that I hadn't filed an initial fee app for my $2,500
that was paid pre-petition. I called up and explained to Sylvia Grezel
that I had duly executed and filed the RARA agreement which stated (as did my
Attorney Compensation Statement) that I was paid this $2,500.

Clearly, we are not required to do a fee app if
the RARA is used. LBR 3015-1 (u)(1): "If the RARA form is signed
by the attorney and the debtor, filed, and served on the responsible chapter
13 trustee in any case, the fees outlined therein may be approved without further detailed fee application or hearing..."

Rojas is taking the position that that is fine,
unless you file a supplemental fee application, which then requires you go
back and do an original fee application.

Does this make any sense to anyone? What
the heck is the purpose of using the RARA form then??

***********************************************Mark J.
MarkusLaw Office of Mark J. Markus11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB
#403Studio City, CA 91604-2652(818)509-1173(818)509-1460
(fax)e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.comweb:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I just had a supp. fee app bounced by Rojas' office for the reason that I hadn't filed an initial fee app for my $2,500 that was paid pre-petition. I called up and explained to Sylvia Grezel that I had duly executed and filed the RARA agreement which stated (as did my Attorney Compensation Statement) that I was paid this $2,500.
Clearly, we are not required to do a fee app if the RARA is used. LBR 3015-1 (u)(1): "If the RARA form is signed by the attorney and the debtor, filed, and served on the responsible chapter 13 trustee in any case, the fees outlined therein may be approved without further detailed fee application or hearing..."
Rojas is taking the position that that is fine, unless you file a supplemental fee application, which then requires you go back and do an original fee application.
Does this make any sense to anyone? What the heck is the purpose of using the RARA form then??
***********************************************
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)
e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.com
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
************************************************
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 (818)
509-1173 or e-mail us at bklawr@bklaw.com and destroy the
original message and all copies.
I just had a supp. fee app bounced by Rojas' office
for the reason that I hadn't filed an initial fee app for my $2,500 that was
paid pre-petition. I called up and explained to Sylvia Grezel that I had
duly executed and filed the RARA agreement which stated (as did my AttorneyCompensation Statement) that I was paid this $2,500.

Clearly, we are not required to do a fee app if the
RARA is used. LBR 3015-1 (u)(1): "If the RARA form is signed by the
attorney and the debtor, filed, and served on the responsible chapter 13 trustee
in any case, the fees outlined therein may be approved without further detailed
fee application or hearing..."

Rojas is taking the position that that is fine,
unless you file a supplemental fee application, which then requires you go back
and do an original fee application.

Does this make any sense to anyone? What the
heck is the purpose of using the RARA form then??

***********************************************Mark J. MarkusLaw
Office of Mark J. Markus11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403Studio City, CA91604-2652(818)509-1173(818)509-1460 (fax)e-mail: bklawr@bklaw.comweb:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.