Bankruptcy Code. Title 11 of the United States Code governs bankruptcy proceedings. Bankruptcy is a matter of federal law and is, with the exception of exemptions, the same in every state. When federal bankruptcy law conflicts with state law, federal law controls. Bankruptcy Code incorporating changes effective 10/17/05.
Here is a report that aired on National Public Radio this morning about the judicial mortgage modification bill pending in Congress.
“On Capitol Hill, Democrats are supporting a bill that would let judges block home foreclosures. The measure would allow bankruptcy judges to alter home loans. Industry insiders say that would cause more harm than good, but economists disagree.”
Listen to today’s National Public Radio story
on judicial mortgage modification in chapter 13 bankruptcy.
The Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act of 2009 is pending in Congress. If passed, chapter 13 debtors will be able to rewrite their delinquent mortgage loans by lowering the loan balance to the value of the home, reducing interest rates, eliminating the variable rate and fixing the interest rate, and stretching out the mortgage over 40 years. The goal is to lower the payments enough to make them affordable for the borrower to keep the home and avoid foreclosure of the mortgage.
Mortgage bankers want your home not your money. They oppose the law change and are lobbying against the proposed legislation.
Legislation is pending in Congress to change the law to allow judges to modify your home mortgage in chapter 13 bankruptcy. Delinquent mortgages could be stretched out to 40 years, principal due on the loan reduced to the value of the home, and adjustable rates changed to a low fixed rate if the Helping Families Save Their Homes in Bankruptcy Act of 2009 passes. Judicial modification might lower the payments enough to make it possible to afford to stay in your home.
Contact your elected representatives today by email, phone or fax. This legislative, which President Barack Obama has pledged to sign, is on a fast track but opposed by the many in the mortgage and banking industries. Here is the contact information for contacting Congress: www.savehomewithbankruptcy.com/lobby.htm.
David Leibowitz, my blogging colleague on Mortgage Law Network, explains how bankruptcy can help save your home under the current law.
DATA: MORTGAGE “FORECLOSURE PREVENTION” FIXES FAILING TO WORK, U.S. HOME FORECLOSURE TOLL NOW EXPECTED TO RISE EVEN HIGHER TO EIGHT MILLION
Near Half of Homeowners in “Loan Modification” Programs Face Higher Monthly Payments; Failure of Voluntary Industry Efforts Hikes Pressure on Incoming Obama Administration, New Congress to Clear Way for Court-Supervised Modifications.
WASHINGTON, D.C.//December 19, 2008//Much hyped “foreclosure prevention programs” relying on voluntary loan modifications are failing to reach a significant number of troubled homeowners and are often backfiring when they do so, according to newly updated research released today by the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (NACBA). The across-the-board failure of these much ballyhooed “fixes” for the foreclosure crisis are expected to result in the new President and Congress facing considerable new pressure to clear the way for court-supervised loan modifications that will prove more beneficial for homeowners.Continue Reading
Here are five New Year’s resolutions my blogging colleague, Peter Orville of Upstate New York, made for people with debt problems, each highlighting an article found on the pages of Debt Law Network, Credit Law Network or Bankruptcy Law Network.
The Kansas Bankruptcy Court adopted a new rule requiring chapter 13 debtors behind on mortgage debts when the bankruptcy case is filed to be paid through the trustee. The rule goes into effect for cases filed on or after October 1, 2008.
Proponents of the new rule say the chapter 13 trustee records will aid the court in protecting debtors from charges for inappropriate fees and from false allegations of nonpayments. Opponents of the new rule object to the chapter 13 fee (up to 10%) added to the to the mortgage payments, creating additional financial hardship for debtors.
EDITOR UPDATE: This post is out of date. Judge Karlin reverted to her original ruling in In re Law after the Pearson decision was vacated. This issue is currently pending the the U.S. Court for the Tenth Circuit so we should have a binding ruling soon. December 13, 2009.
Topeka Bankruptcy Judge Janice Miller Karlin announced last week that she is reversing course and will follow the Pearson decision to allow debtors a means test deduction for ownership of a car without a debt against it.
Judge Karlin had earlier disallowed the car ownership deduction in In re Law, 2008 WL 1867971 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2008), following the decision by Kansas District Court Judge John W. Lungstrum in Wieland v. Thomas, 382 B.R. 793 (D. Kan. March 4, 2008), reversing Judge Robert D. Berger of Kansas City, KS, in In re Thomas, 2007 WL 2903201 (Bankr. D. Kan. Oct. 02, 2007).Continue Reading
It will be a little easier to qualify for bankruptcy relief when the income guidelines used for eligibility increase slightly on October 1. A single Kansas earner will be able to make $894 more per year and qualify for chapter 7 bankruptcy relief. A family of four will be allowed a $2036 more income per year in Kansas.
Here are the “means test” figures now in effect and the figures approved by the U.S. Trustee for bankruptcy cases file on October 1, 2008, or after.
BAPCPA (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention And Consumer Protection Act Of 2005) has been characterized as among the best (or worst depending on point of view) examples of special interest federal legislation ever passed by Congress. The act’s history is important:
Under pressure from creditor lobbying efforts, Congress and the Clinton administration in 1994 funded a bi-partisan blue ribbon panel dubbed the Bankruptcy Review Commission. Its mission was a comprehensive study of the bankruptcy system in response to creditor interests’ complaints of widespread but undocumented abuses.
Democrats’ poor showings in 1992 and 1994 elections left Congress controlled by Republicans. President Clinton agreed to a commission to find the facts. The credit industry argued a significant number of Americans had the “ability to repay” their debts, but egged on by greedy bankruptcy attorneys, debtors were choosing instead to slough off debt. Debtors were cast as well-to-do credit card abusers who were financially irresponsible, increasing the cost of borrowing for others. Little or no evidence was ever offered to back up creditors’ arguments.Continue Reading
