BUSINESS USE MUST BE “SIGNIFICANT” TO ESCAPE 910 FULL PAYMENT
In re Wilson, Case No. 06-40637
December 2006, Judge Karlin
Debtor sought to avoid the full payment requirement of the 910 car loan provision. Debtors were using the vehicles in question for personal and business use, as they served as foster parents. The court followed Lowder and Bolze. The Court adopted a “significant and material” approach and found that the vehicles were used “significantly” for personal purposes in finding that the vehicles were subject to the 910 paragraph.
Digest by: Jan Hamilton, Trustee
Related posts:
- What Is Personal Use of Vehicle for 910 Claim? PERSONAL VS. BUSINESS USE FOR 910 CAR CLAIMS In re Lowder, Case No. 05-44802 August 2006, Judge Karlin Creditor objected...
- 910 Car Claims Get Interest SURRENDER IN FULL SATISFACTION OF 910 AND PAYMENT IN FULL WITH NOT INTEREST NOT ALLOWED In re McClay, Case No....
- Creditor Gets Deficiency Claim After Collateral Surrender 10th CIRCUIT ‘RULES’ In re Rule, Case No. 06-22145 July, 2008, Judge Berger Judge Berger followed In re Ballard 526...
- Is Force Placed Insurance Part of 910 Vehicle Claim? COST OF FORCED PLACED INSURANCE IS PART OF PMSI FOR 910 VEHICLE In re Townsend, Case No 07-20956 April 2008,...
- Means Test Form Controls Unless Significant Changes in Circumstances B22C CONTROLS UNLESS SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES In re Lanning, Case No. 06-41037 May 2007, Judge Karlin Over the Chapter...
