What is FSBO (For Sale By Owner)? FSBO (For Sale By Owner) refers to the process of selling one’s home without the help of a real estate agent or broker. With the rise of house listing websites and new tools to aid FSBO sellers, this cost-effective method has become more accessible to the average homeowner.  Eliminating a real estate agent may increase profit from your house’s sale. However, going the FSBO route means more work for the seller. FSBO sellers must take on the responsibilities of listing a property, marketing it, hosting open houses, and negotiating with interested buyers. Why hire an FSBO Lawyer? Real estate law is complex and ever-changing. Hiring a FSBO lawyer mitigates the risks associated with real estate transactions while saving time and frustration. Yet, the most significant benefit of an FSBO lawyer is that they can prevent potentially expensive complications that could derail or delay a sale. What can an FSBO Lawyer do for sellers? Negotiate purchase and sale agreements with buyers.Draft contracts, purchase agreements, and closing documents in accordance with federal, state, and local laws.Offer counsel in the event of a dispute with a buyer.Tailor legal advice to the seller’s unique situation and help sellers to foresee potential problems.If anything at closing goes awry, such as the buyer backing out or an issue with your title insurance, a lawyer will be on your side to assist and protect your home sale.Without a real estate lawyer, FSBO sellers need to arrange for title insurance, preparing the deed, and scheduling the closing. What does a real estate lawyer do for an FSBO buyer? Buying a home is a significant investment and a milestone in the life of many buyers. Real estate lawyers handle the often-overwhelming amount of paperwork involved in a real estate purchase. FSBO buyers can be confident that when a FSBO lawyer is involved in a deal, the transaction will be free of scams, unfavorable terms, and legal obstacles. Assist FSBO buyers with writing and revising an Offer to Purchase as well as any needed counteroffers.A FSBO lawyer can negotiate on your behalf during the purchase process.Review documents and contracts for red flags and potential problems.Make certain that sellers are following all federal, state, and local laws.Eliminate the risk of potentially costly errors in documents and contracts.Help buyers with construction, zoning, and association questions.Wisconsin real estate lawyers can review the property’s title to ensure that there are no liens or easements. Do I need a lawyer for a Wisconsin FSBO real estate sale?  The State of Wisconsin does not legally require sellers to have a lawyer for their FSBO real estate transaction. However, 21 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have deemed it lawfully necessary for all FSBO sellers to employ a lawyer during the real estate closing process.  Frequently Asked Questions  When should a seller hire a real estate lawyer? Selling a home is complex, and the potential legal pitfalls can be difficult to foresee. For first-time sellers, a FSBO lawyer should be considered an essential part of the selling process from start to finish. Some experienced FSBO sellers wait to bring in a lawyer until a problem arises, such as a dispute with a buyer or uncertainty about a contract’s terms. Getting a lawyer involved early – as soon as you decide to go it alone – gives the seller an edge throughout the process.  How much does a Wisconsin FSBO lawyer cost? The cost of a Wisconsin FSBO lawyer may vary, and the price depends on several factors. To determine the cost of an FSBO lawyer for your situation, call Wynn at Law, LLC at 262-725-0175.  How do I sell my home without a real estate agent?  Selling a home without a real estate agent is a great way to save on costs while maintaining freedom and control throughout the selling process. Successful FSBO sellers typically follow these six steps:  Retain a Wisconsin FSBO lawyer.Research the local housing market and view other properties for sale in the area.Prepare your home for pictures, open houses, tours, and showings.Set the asking price for your house and list the property for sale on Zillow, FSBO.com, and Trulia.Show your home to interested buyers.Negotiate and accept the best offer. What is the difference between a real estate lawyer and a real estate agent? Real estate agents are not attorneys. Real estate agents cannot provide legal advice on contracts or other legal aspects of the transaction process. Agents cannot interpret title work or draft conveyance documents like a deed. Conversely, real estate lawyers can provide legal counsel, draft legal documents, and ensure that the transaction follows local, state, and federal regulations. Generally, a real estate agent is paid a commission based upon the sales price at closing and a real estate attorney is paid a set hourly rate. Do the FSBO buyer and seller both need a real estate lawyer? Hiring a lawyer to protect your rights, money, and real estate transaction is the common sense thing for both FSBO parties. It is highly recommended that both buyers and sellers have a lawyer during FSBO real estate transactions. A real estate lawyer cannot represent both parties in a transaction, as it would be a conflict of interest. A buyer’s lawyer protects the buyer and ensures that the sale meets all legal requirements. The FSBO seller’s lawyer maximizes the seller’s interests and ensures the transaction follows a lawful process for the deed’s transfer.  Wynn at Law, LLC’s Real Estate Closing Checklist For Buyers Wynn at Law, LLC’s Real Estate Closing Checklist For Sellers Contact Wynn at Law, LLC for all FSBO Transactions If you are selling your home FSBO (For Sale By Owner) or buying a home FSBO, you need a knowledgeable real estate lawyer to protect your interests in the transaction.  Wynn at Law, LLC will ensure your FSBO sale is completed lawfully and works diligently to provide the best outcome for our clients. If you plan to buy or sell a home FSBO, contact our real estate lawyers to assist you every step of the way. Our knowledgeable FSBO lawyers are active members of the Wisconsin Realtors Association and will work with you to get the highest return on your house’s sale. Wynn at Law, LLC has law offices located in Salem, Lake Geneva, and Delavan, Wisconsin. Contact us at 262-725-0175 to schedule an appointment today. The post A Wisconsin Lawyer’s Guide to FSBO Real Estate Transactions appeared first on Wynn at Law, LLC.

Summary: On September 23, 2019, Mouzon Bass, the president of Ebenconcepts, Inc., which was the Debtor’s former employer, assigned to the Debtor a whole life insurance policy with a cash value of $814,917.00 in consideration for the Debtor’s shares in … Bankr. E.D.N.C.: Harden v. Harrison- Re-Designation of Beneficiary of Whole Life Insurance was not a Transfer Read More »

    One of the more common areas of litigation in bankruptcy is a request by a creditor to find that the debt owed to them is not discharged by the bankruptcy based on misrepresentation when the debt is made pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2).  A good analysis of the elements required under this section is provided in In re Polasky, 2021 Bankr. LEXIS 362, 2021 WL 614032, Adv. No. 2:18-ap-594-FMD (Bankr. M.D. FL 17 February 2021).   The case involved the sale of a parcel of real estate on which debtor operated a hair salon to an investor for $900,000 with a lease agreement with the buyer which was guaranteed by the debtor for four years.  The sale closed on 30 October 2017.  Six months later the debtor advised that the salon could not meet its obligations as they came due, and was dissolving.  The owners filed for relief under chapter 7 in 2018.  In 2019 the buyer sold the property to a third party for $735,000.   Plaintiff alleged in its §523(a)(2) complaint that debtor schemed with her spouse to induce Plaintiff to purchase the property by representing that the business was profitable  and would be able to meet able to perform it's obligations under the lease.  The allegations included that the salon's owners provided information purporting to show the company's viability and asserted that plaintiff relied on such representations when in fact the business was operating at a loss, requiring substantial loans for the owner's spouse to continue operating.      The Court first noted that under §523(a)(2) a plaintiff must prove all the elements of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence.1  As the complaint did not specify whether it was proceeding under §523(a)(2)(A) or §523(a)(2)(B), the Court examined both provisions.   §523(a)(2)(A) involves debts obtained by false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud other than a statement respecting the debtor's or an insider's financial condition.  §523(a)(2)(B) on the other hand applies to a statement in writing  that i) is materially false, ii) respects the debtor's or an insider's financial condition;  iii) on which the creditor reasonably relied, and iv) that the debtor caused to be made or published with intent to deceive.   The representations relied on by plaintiff were contained in two emails from the Polonski's real estate agent to the buyer's real estate agent.  The first email included a copy of the lease and profit and loss statements from the salon.  The second email involved responses by Polonski's agent to questions regarding the profit and loss statements and the relocation of equipment.   Since the emails on which Plaintiff relies relate to the salon's financial condition, they cannot support a claim under §523(a)(2)(A).  The court then examined the four elements required under §523(a)(2)(B).  First, a plaintiff must not only show the statement is untrue, it must show that the statement paints a substantially untruthful picture of the debtor's or insider's financial condition, and that the statement misrepresented the type of information that would normally affect the decision at issue.2  Plaintiff alleged that the P&L's portrayed the salon as a highly profitable business that was current on the lease when it was actually in default on the lease and hemorrhaging losses.  While the Court found the record supported a finding that the Salon was financially troubled and being propped up by loans from the husband, the only information on the P&Ls showed the cash flow, not total assets and liabilities.  Plaintiff was unable to produce evidence that the profit and loss cash flow statements were inaccurate.  Next, a plaintiff must show reasonable reliance on the financial statement.  This reliance is based on an objective standard, whether an ordinary person would have relied on the statements based on the totality of the circumstances.  Here Plaintiff's purchase of the property as an investment reflected his primary concern whether the salon could perform under the lease in the future.  However a statement about an act to be performed in the future is essentially a promise, and only actionable if the debtor made the statement with no intent of keeping the promise.3  Plaintiff was unable to prove that at the time the P&L's were sent or at the time the new lease was entered Debtor intended to terminate the lease.  Further, there was testimony as to concern by the buyer's real estate agent of a possible default, and acknowledgment that the debtor intended to sell the salon at some time in the future.  Other factors indicating reliance was not reasonable was there there were no prior dealings between the parties, that debtor was both the property owner and the tenant so debtor's self-dealings could be considered a red flag to alert plaintiff of the need to verify the information; the P&L's were prepared by an internal bookkeeper rather than an independent professional, the P&Ls did not reflect outstanding gift certificates, Plaintiff did not request copies of the salon's tax returns, a balance sheet, or other financial statements,  Plaintiff did not request personal financial information from Debtor, and the Plaintiff's manager never spoke directly to the debtor or her spouse, instead communicating only through the real estate agent.  Finally, Plaintiff did not show by a preponderance of the evidence that debtor made the statement as to her financial condition with the intent to deceive the creditor.  Again, court's look to the totality of the circumstances in making this determination.  Courts also try to distinguish between dishonest debtors and careless debtors.  Plaintiff relies on an email from Debtor's husband to their own real estate agent  disclosing 1) the husband's lien is being paid from the sale proceeds, 2) Debtor's claimed lack of knowledge regarding the salon's financial statements, and 3) a promissory note dated as of the closing date payable from the salon to Debtor and her husband.  Plaintiff contends that these show the Debtor knew that the salon was in substantial debt and would not be able to comply with the new lease.  Again, the Court recognized that Debtor knew the salon was in poor health before the sale, but Plaintiff was a sophisticated real estate investor did not prove Debtor falsely represented the salon's profitability knowing or intending that the salon would default on the lease.  The email relied on was not written by Debtor, was not addressed to Plaintiff's agent, and makes no reference to a plan to close the salon.   Thus the Court found the debt was discharged by the bankruptcy due to the failure of Plaintiff to show the elements of the statute by a preponderance of the evidence.1 Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 287-288, 111 S. Ct. 654, 660, 112 L. Ed. 2d 755 (1991).↩2 In re Anzo, 547 B.R. 454, 465-66 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2016).↩3 In re Moore, 620 B.R. 617, 629 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2020).↩Michael BarnettMichael Barnett, PA506 N Armenia Ave.Tampa, FL 33609-1703813 870-3100https://hillsboroughbankruptcy.com .  

This article originally appeared in politicalsay on February 19, 2021 at https://politicsay.com/ag-letitia-james-wont-sue-nyc-over-taxi-medallion-debt/AG Letitia James won’t sue NYC over taxi medallion debt New York Attorney General Letitia James has abandoned her threat to sue New York City into providing financial relief to taxi drivers burdened by debt from medallions purchased at inflated costs at city-sponsored auctions, her office said Thursday.James had threatened to sue last February — warning the city and its Taxi and Limousine Commission that it had 30 days to fork over the money.But 30 days came and went and James did not take action. On Thursday, her office argued a lawsuit would take years to settle, delaying financial benefits for drivers.Instead, James has endorsed a proposal from the New York Taxi Worker’s Alliance to write medallion loans down to $125,000.“This proposal would provide a fiscally fair and responsible way to support the recovery of the taxi medallion industry by guaranteeing loans written down to no more than $125,000, which is why I have been working with the city to approve it since last year,” James said in a statement to Crain’s.“This relief package not only lays out the best way to support the needs of a community that has been economically devastated right now without burdensome and drawn-out litigation, but will help to ensure justice is finally delivered for thousands of medallion owners.”Last year’s threat to sue came after an investigation by the AG’s office concluded that the city made “over $855 million” off medallion auctions between 2002 and 2014, despite knowing as early as 2011 that the medallions were selling at higher than their actual value.Drivers have demonstrated for months in support of NYTWA’s relief proposal. A competing plan from U.S. Congressman Ritchie Torres (D-The Bronx) proposed to re-peg the value of medallions at $250,000.NYTWA Director Bhairavi Desai lamented the decision not to pursue the city in court, but welcomed James’ support for her group’s bailout plan.“We know it’s because of technicalities and status of limitations, but it doesn’t make it less painful and infuriating that so many ex-city officials have gotten away with destroying drivers’ lives,” Desai told The Post.“Our proposal is the only way forward, not just for survival but also for an ounce of justice.

Summary: Emily Bennett owned an real property in fee simple in Rockingham County. In December 2019, she executed a Power of Attorney appointing Lisa Bennett-Smith as her attorney-in-fact. A few days later on December 9, 2016, Ms. Bennett-Smith transferred the … Bankr. M.D.N.C.: Anderson v. Bennett-Smith- Contructively Fraudulent Transfer and Recovery of Asset by Trustee Read More »

This article originally appeared on Forbes on February 16, 2021 the article can be found at:https://www.forbes.com/sites/markkantrowitz/2021/02/16/student-loan-forgiveness-myths/?sh=36f6097450c5Student Loan Forgiveness MythsBorrowers and policymakers have been urging President Joe Biden and Congress to forgive student loan debt. Student loans are complicated and confusing. This has contributed to many misconceptions about student loan forgiveness. Some of these myths support student loan forgiveness and some oppose it.Let’s debunk some of the more common student loan forgiveness myths.There are many misconceptions and myths about student loan forgiveness. GETTY President Biden Will Forgive All Student LoansThis myth asserts that President Biden will forgive all student loans.Senator Bernie Sanders proposed forgiving all student loans, not President Joe Biden.Even if Congress were to pass legislation forgiving student loans, it is likely to fall short of forgiving all student loans. The Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act (HEROES Act), which passed the U.S. House of Representatives but did not pass the U.S. Senate, proposed forgiving up to $10,000 in student loans per borrower. President Biden has said that he supports $10,000 in student loan forgiveness per borrower.Due to the cost, Congress is likely to limit the forgiveness in various ways, such as limiting it to borrowers who are experiencing economic distress, borrowers who owe less than $10,000 and borrowers who earn less than $125,000.The President Can Forgive All Student LoansThis myth claims that the President can forgive all student loans through executive order.A few policymakers have stated that the President (actually, the Secretary of Education) has the legal authority to forgive all student loans.MORE FOR YOU Student Loan Cancellation Less Likely If Stimulus Checks Get Cut3 Reasons Why Biden Excluded Student Loan Relief From Stimulus – And What It Means For BorrowersBiden Comes Out Against $50,000 In Student Loan Forgiveness - But Supports This Amount, InsteadThis false assertion is based on a misreading of the waiver authority in the Higher Education Act of 1965 [20 USC 1082(a)(6)], taken out of context. The waiver authority, which applies only to loans made under the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) and Federal Perkins Loan programs, is limited to operating within the scope of the statute. Specifically, when Congress authorizes a loan forgiveness program, such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness, Teacher Loan Forgiveness or the Total and Permanent Disability Discharge, the U.S. Department of Education has the authority to forgive student loans as authorized under the terms of these loan forgiveness programs.Also, the parallel terms clause in the Higher Education Act of 1965, which requires Direct Loan program loans to have the same terms and conditions as FFEL program loans, does not apply to waiver authority, which is not part of the terms and conditions of the loans.Only Congress has the power of the purse. The executive branch cannot spend money that has not been appropriated by Congress. Congress can pass legislation to forgive student loans, but without this legislation, the President does not have the legal authority to issue blanket student loan forgiveness.The waiver authority also does not apply to private student loans.The Legal Authority for the Payment Pause and Interest Waiver Can Be Used to Forgive Student LoansSome people claim that President Trump used the waiver authority to implement the payment pause and interest waiver, setting a precedent that could be used to forgive student loans.President Trump did not identify the legal authority used to implement the payment pause and interest waiver in his executive memo, but there are three possibilities that do not rely on a misreading of the general waiver authority.The statutory definition of the economic hardship deferment provides the Secretary of Education with the authority to create other eligibility criteria for the economic hardship deferment. [20 USC 1085(o)(1)(B)]The regulations for the Direct Loan program allow the Secretary of Education to provide administrative forbearance “due to a national military mobilization or other local or national emergency.” [34 CFR 685.205(b)(8)]The Heroes Act of 2003 authorizes the Secretary of Education to ensure that “recipients of student financial assistance under Title IV of the Act who are affected individuals are not placed in a worse position financially in relation to that financial assistance because of their status as affected individuals” in connection with a war or other military operation or national emergency. Affected individuals include individuals who “suffered direct economic hardship as a direct result of a war or other military operation or national emergency.” [20 USC 1098bb(a)(2)(A)]Student Loan Forgiveness Will Stimulate the EconomyThis myth claims that “student debt cancellation can … give a boost to our struggling economy through a consumer-driven economic stimulus that can result in greater home-buying rates and housing stability.”Forgiving student loan debt yields an annual financial impact that is about 6% of the amount forgiven, corresponding to the amount borrowers are actually paying on their student loans.Student loan payments total about $100 billion a year, approximately 0.4% of GDP. (For comparison, the cost of the payment pause and interest waiver is about $60 billion a year.) Forgiving all student loan debt will yield a smaller positive impact on the economy in the short term than other stimulus efforts.Student loan forgiveness will also not have a big impact on home-buying rates.According to research by Federal Reserve economists, a $1,000 increase in student loan debt before age 23 causes “a decrease of about 1.5 percentage points in the homeownership rate,” which is the “equivalent to a delay of 2.5 months in attaining homeownership.” This effect, however, disappears by the time borrowers enter their early thirties. Thus, student loan debt affects only the timing of homeownership, not the attainment of homeownership.Student loan debt outstanding is one-sixth of mortgage debt outstanding. A similar ratio applies to comparisons of student loan and mortgage balances and loan payment amounts.Based on data from 2017 follow-up to the 2016 Baccalaureate and Beyond longitudinal study (B&B:16/17), the average student loan payment among Bachelor’s degree recipients is $306, compared with an average car payment of $392 and an average mortgage payment of $1,254. The average rent payment for borrowers who don’t own homes is $875, yielding a difference of $379, which is greater than the average student loan payment.Student Loan Forgiveness Will Provide Immediate Financial ReliefThis myth claims that student loan forgiveness will provide immediate financial relief to millions of student loan borrowers who are experiencing economic distress because of the pandemic and recession.Forgiving less than the full amount owed might not yield much of an immediate impact because it will change the remaining time in repayment but not the monthly payment amount. This is especially true of borrowers in income-driven repayment plans, where the loan payments are based on the borrowers’ income and not the amount they owe. Even with $50,000 in student loan forgiveness, more than 40% of borrowers in income-driven repayment plans will still owe some student loan debt.Thus, student loan forgiveness provides long-term financial relief but not necessarily short-term financial relief.The payment pause and interest waiver, on the other hand, provides immediate financial relief.Student Loan Forgiveness Will Solve the Student Loan ProblemThis myth claims that student loan forgiveness is a solution to the student loan problem.There really isn’t a student loan problem, so much as a college completion problem. Students who drop out of college are four times more likely to default on their federal student loans than borrowers who graduate, and represent more than two-thirds of the defaults. Borrowers who drop out of college have the debt, but not the degree that can help them repay the debt.Most borrowers who graduate are able to repay their student loans. Only 0.1% of Bachelor’s degree recipients and 1.1% of Associate’s degree recipients default on their federal student loans.Forgiving student loans will not increase the number of students enrolling in college. It will not increase the number of students graduating from college. It will not make college more affordable.The average federal student loan debt of borrowers who are in default on their federal student loans is about $22,000.Student Loan Forgiveness Will Close the Racial Debt GapThis myth claims that student loan forgiveness is the best way to address racial disparities in student loan debt.Students who attend Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBC Us) are twice as likely to borrow to pay for college. They also graduate with 25% more student loan debt. Their student loan payments represent a greater share of income.But, forgiving $50,000 in student loan debt per borrower is not the most effective way of closing the racial debt gap. Only 18% of the financial benefit from blanket student loan forgiveness will go to Black or African-American borrowers. Instead, why not just forgive the student loan debt of all borrowers who attended HBC Us? This student loan debt was caused, in part, by chronic underfunding of these institutions. The cost of this forgiveness is about $30 billion.The Federal Government Can’t Forgive Private Student LoansThis myth asserts that the federal government can’t forgive private student loans, just federal education loans.The Truth in Lending Act [15 USC 1650(e)] bans prepayment penalties on private education loans. The Higher Education Act of 1965 [20 USC 1083(a)(14)] bans prepayment penalties on federal education loans, including those held by private lenders.So, Congress could pass a law to forgive private student loans by appropriating funds to pay off the loan balances.This would cause losses for the lenders and investors in student loan securitizations, since they would not receive the future interest revenue they were expecting, just par value for the loans.Lenders might respond by no longer offering private student loans or by charging higher interest rates.All Student Loan Forgiveness Is Tax-FreeThis myth claims that all student loan forgiveness is tax-free.Some student loan forgiveness is tax-free and some is taxable.Generally, if student loan forgiveness is provided by the loan program, it is tax-free if the loan forgiveness requires the recipient to work in certain professions for a specified period of time. Examples include Public Service Loan Forgiveness and Teacher Loan Forgiveness.Certain student loan discharges are also tax-free. These include the death and disability discharges (through December 31, 2025), closed school discharges, false certification discharges, unpaid refund discharges and the borrower defense to repayment discharge.Employer-paid student loan repayment assistance programs, or LRA Ps, are also tax-free through the end of 2025.Otherwise, the cancellation of debt is treated like taxable income to the borrower under current law. It is as though someone provided the borrower with income to pay off the debt. Thus, the forgiveness after 20 or 25 years in an income-driven repayment plan is taxable.The IRS will forgive tax debts when the taxpayer is insolvent (total debt exceeds total assets). A borrower who has been in an income-driven repayment plan for two decades is likely to be insolvent. But, there are no guarantees that the tax debt will be forgiven.Student Loans Can Be Discharged in BankruptcyThis myth asserts that student loan forgiveness is not necessary because student loans can be discharged in bankruptcy.Bankruptcy discharge of student loans is very rare.There is an exception to bankruptcy discharge of student loans unless the debt imposes an “undue hardship” on the borrower and the borrower’s dependents. This is a very harsh standard, requiring a current and future inability to repay the debt while maintaining a minimal standard of living. One bankruptcy court judge referred to it as requiring “a certainty of hopelessness.”Certain other types of student loans, such as bar study loans and residency/relocation loans, can also be discharged because they are not considered to be qualified education loans.The Federal Government Has Never Previously Forgiven Student LoansThis myth asserts that the federal government generally does not forgive student loans.The source of this myth is the very low approval rates for public service loan forgiveness and borrower defense to repayment discharges. Only about 3% of borrowers who applied for public service loan forgiveness have been approved. Some of those borrowers were not eligible for loan forgiveness (yet) and the loan servicer miscounted the number of qualifying payments for other borrowers. A similarly low percentage of borrower defense to repayment claims were approved by the Trump Administration.But, borrowers do qualify for other types of loan forgiveness. About 37,000 teachers qualify for teacher loan forgiveness each year. About 4,700 borrowers qualify for an automatic closed school discharge each year.Student Loan Forgiveness Creates A Moral HazardThis myth asserts that student loan forgiveness creates a risk of moral hazard.Moral hazard occurs when a student borrows to the limit because they expect their student loans to be forgiven.Most student loan forgiveness programs cap the amount of forgiveness per borrower, thereby limiting the potential for moral hazard.The main exceptions are public service loan forgiveness and income-driven repayment plans. Public service loan forgiveness cancels the remaining debt after the borrower has made 120 qualifying payments. The income-driven repayment plans cancel the remaining debt after 240 or 300 loan payments. A borrower must have very low income for a decade or longer to qualify for some loan forgiveness.Blanket student loan forgiveness is likely to be a one-time event and the amount of loan forgiveness is likely to be limited.Obama Student Loan ForgivenessThis myth claims that borrowers are eligible for Obama Student Loan Forgiveness after paying down 10% of their student loan debt or satisfying other easy criteria.There is no such thing as “Obama Student Loan Forgiveness.” This is a name used by some student loan scams who say that they will help you apply for student loan forgiveness, if you pay them an up-front fee. The promised loan forgiveness never materializes. Changing an up-front fee for credit repair, including student loan forgiveness, violates federal and state consumer protection laws. The Federal Trace Commission (FTC) and several state attorneys general cracked down on such advance-fee loan scams in Operation Game of Loans.Often, these scams describe a fictional loan forgiveness program that garbles characteristics of Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) and certain income-driven repayment plans.Public Service Loan Forgiveness was created by the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007, during the Bush Administration, not the Obama Administration. The loan forgiveness program became effective on October 1, 2007, before President Obama took office. This law also created income-based repayment, which became available starting on July 1, 2009. Neither of these programs were ever called Obama Student Loan Forgiveness.Private student loans are not eligible for Public Service Loan Forgiveness or income-driven repayment.Follow me on Twitter. Check out my website or some of my other work here. Mark KantrowitzI am Publisher of PrivateStudentLoans.guru, a free web site about borrowing to pay for college. I am an expert on student financial aid, the FAFSA, scholarships, 529… Read MorePrintReprints & Permissions

Essential Distinctions Between a Student Loan Forgiveness & Discharge Arizona Bankruptcy Attorneys Explain Student Loan Debt Relief Methods Student loan debt is one of the biggest debts that people carry – and one of the biggest reasons they start thinking whether or not to file for bankruptcy. Unfortunately, it is very, very difficult to discharge student debt in bankruptcy. It is so difficult that most bankruptcy attorneys will tell you that it’s not possible. Instead, bankruptcy can be a tool for getting other debt relief so that you have the money needed to pay your student loans. However, there are other ways that you may be able to relieve your burden for student loans. Student loan discharge eliminates the debt so you no longer have to pay it. Student loan forgiveness is a means of removing your obligation to pay the debt. Both require that you meet certain criteria. Here’s what you need to know: Student Loan Discharge There are few situations in which the government will agree to discharge your student loans. Your loans can be discharged if you die, but most people aren’t going to count on their own deaths for debt relief. However, if your spouse dies, know that you will be able to discharge the debt. The government may also discharge student debt for: Total & Permanent Disability Identity Theft: You will have to prove that someone has stolen your identity to open a line of credit in your name. Fraudulent Misrepresentation: You will have to prove that your school fraudulently signed your name to a loan application, misled you about the school or your career options after graduation, or failed to let you know about reimbursement money you were owed. As you can see, the options for getting a student loan discharge are scarce, and the criteria are narrow. If you are simply looking to have your debt discharged because you are unable to pay it, you won’t be successful. Student Loan Forgiveness If you have worked in a certain field, you may be eligible to have your student loans forgiven after a certain time period. The government offers this benefit in exchange for needed service, such as teaching or other public service. Two primary programs are available for student loan forgiveness: Public Service Loan Forgiveness and Teacher Loan Forgiveness. Under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness, you need to have worked in a public service position for at least 10 years and have made your student loan payments for the previous 120 months. Public service positions might include police officer, firefighter, social worker, doctor, or nurse. Under the Teacher Loan Forgiveness program, you must have been a teacher in a qualifying school for five years, as well as meeting other criteria. If you qualify, you can have up to $17,500 of your debt forgiven. You may have much more debt than that, so this option does not offer total debt relief. As you can, there are not many options for relieving yourself of your student loan burden. Even if you find yourself unable to pay your loans, the best the government will do is defer your payments or lower them to match your ability to pay. However, that only kicks your debt problem down the road. It doesn’t solve it. To get true debt relief, you will need to look at options like bankruptcy. Though you may not be able to discharge your student loan debt in bankruptcy, you can discharge other debts, and that can free up a lot of money to pay down your student debt (or just to manage your monthly payments). Talk to a bankruptcy attorney about how bankruptcy can help your particular financial circumstances. Contact Experienced Bankruptcy Lawyers In Phoenix, AZ Call My AZ Lawyers today to talk with a bankruptcy attorney about what kind of debt relief is possible for you through bankruptcy. Our attorneys represent clients in Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which offers a total discharge of unsecured debts, as well as Chapter 13 bankruptcy, which restructures a client’s debt into an affordable repayment plan. We can help you understand how each of these options can help you, as well as how they may impact assets such as your home or vehicle. Our goal is to help you get the maximum debt relief possible. Contact our bankruptcy law office today to talk with a bankruptcy lawyer and learn more. We serve clients throughout the Phoenix area.   Arizona Offices: Mesa Location: 1731 West Baseline Rd., Suite #100 Mesa, AZ 85202 Office: (480) 448-9800 Email: [email protected] Website: https://myazlawyers.com/ Glendale Location: 20325 N 51st Avenue Suite #134, Building 5 Glendale, AZ 85308 Office: (602) 509-0955 Tucson Location: 2 East Congress St., Suite #900-6A Tucson, AZ 85701 Office: (520) 441-1450 Avondale Location: 12725 W. Indian School Rd., Ste E, #101 Avondale, AZ 85392 Office: (623) 469-6603 The post Essential Distinctions Between a Student Loan Forgiveness & Discharge appeared first on My AZ Lawyers.

 In February 2020, Congress passed a new law establishing a new small business bankruptcy filing subchapter, known as “Subchapter V”. The original debt limit for Subchapter V was $2.7 million, however, in March 2020, the CARES Act increased the debt limit to $7.5 million for one year. Unless Congress renews the $7.5 million debt limit established last March, the debt limit will revert back to $2.7 million on March 27, 2021.Subchapter V was designed to be a fast track, cheaper alternative, to traditional chapter 11’s for business. The law is extremely helpful for restaurants, retailers, and other small businesses who prefer reorganization to liquidation or shutting down. In a prior blog post at we discussed many of the benefits of Subchapter V:  https://shenwick.blogspot.com/search?q=subchapter+v   If a small business has debt that exceeds $2.7M and they want to file under Subchapter V, they must file their bankruptcy petition on or before March 27, 2021, unless Congress raises the debt limit.  Any individuals or businesses with questions about Subchapter V should contact Jim Shenwick: (212) 541-6224; [email protected]

Arizona Bankruptcy Exemptions in Chapter 7 & Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Filings Expert Arizona Bankruptcy Attorneys Take a Look at The Exemptions When Filing For Bankruptcy Our Arizona Bankruptcy Lawyers take a look at the exemptions that will be applicable if you are going to file for bankruptcy in Arizona. Bankruptcy exemptions play a large part in both Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy filings in AZ. Bankruptcy exemptions are used to keep property in a bankruptcy filing. Property that you are able to keep by using bankruptcy exemptions is called “exempt property”. Many people mistakenly believe that if you declare bankruptcy, you have to surrender all of your property. While you may have to surrender certain properties to your bankruptcy trustee, you won’t have to give up anything at all with proper planning. If you qualify for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in Arizona, you need to understand the exemptions and how they apply to your situation. What is a Bankruptcy Exemption Regarding Arizona Bankruptcy Filings? Bankruptcy Exemptions are laws that protect your property when filing for bankruptcy. There are both State of Arizona Bankruptcy Exemptions and Federal Bankruptcy Exemptions. Bankruptcy exemptions are a way to level the playing field so that people can keep some of their property when they are considering filing for bankruptcy in Arizona. Bankruptcy Exemptions in Arizona Homestead Exemption The homestead exemption in Arizona is $150,000. You may have up to $150,000 equity in your home, meaning your home can be worth more than that amount if you have enough balance left on your mortgage. For example, your home is worth $500,000 but your mortgage balance is $400,000. Your equity is $100,000, which is safely under the exemption limit of $150,000. Your house would be safe in the bankruptcy. However, let’s say your house is worth $300,000 and your balance is $100,000. Your equity would be $200,000, which is enough over the exemption limit for the bankruptcy trustee to pursue selling the home. The $150,000 would be returned to you, and any excess proceeds from the home sale would be distributed amongst your creditors. You will only have one homestead exemption to use, regardless of if you are married. Motor Vehicles In Arizona, you may have up to $6,000 equity in your vehicle in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. If you are married, you may have two vehicles with up to $6,000 each or one vehicle with up to $12,000 equity. For example, if you are married and have a paid off car worth $5,000, and a financed vehicle worth $25,000 and a balance of $10,000, you could keep the paid in full car but would have to surrender the financed vehicle. The exemption limit for vehicles increases to $25,000 if the filer has a disability that requires special equipment in their vehicle. Bank Accounts When filing your bankruptcy petition, it is important that you pay close attention to your payday and bank account balance. In Arizona, you may either have $300 as a single filer or $600 as a married filer in one bank account on the day that you file. The trustee will request your bank statements to make sure that the balance matches what you listed on your petition. If you had more than the state exemption in your bank account on the day you filed, your trustee may require you to pay that amount towards your bankruptcy estate or have your case dismissed. Personal Items & Household Goods This exemption has a wide reach and can be used on furniture, electronics, and other miscellaneous items around your house. The exemption for a single filer is $6,000, which is doubled for married filers. Clothing The exemption for clothing in Arizona is $500, which doesn’t increase for additional family members. Don’t forget to list your clothing as personal property on your petition, unless you plan on appearing at your 341 Meeting of Creditors without it. Pets, Horses, etc. While pets are often viewed more as a treasured family member than a piece of property, it wouldn’t be fair to let someone with a herd of thousand dollar designer puppies or an expensive equestrian habit to discharge their debts without acknowledging how valuable their pets are. The exemption for pets in Arizona is $500. Exemptions are based on the asset’s current value, so you probably don’t need to worry if you spent slightly more than that on a puppy or kitten that is now fully grown. Engagement & Wedding Rings While you should always try to be presentable for any court appearance, don’t wear your finest jewels to your 341 Meeting of Creditors. The exemption for rings in Arizona is $2,000. Tools & Equipment The exemption for this category is $5,000, and filers may not try to include a vehicle under this exemption to keep an extra vehicle. This is primarily for tools of the trade. Pensions & Retirement Accounts These are generally safe in bankruptcy in Arizona. The reasoning behind this is that requiring low-income debtors to surrender retirement savings will mean more government-funded support for these people in the future. Social security income is also entirely exempt in bankruptcy as an asset and for income qualification purposes. Let Your Arizona Bankruptcy Lawyers Assist You With Bankruptcy Exemptions Clearly, there are many things to keep in mind when deciding whether to file bankruptcy, which chapter to file, and how to best use the bankruptcy exemptions to your benefit. Exemption mistakes could result in you having to surrender beloved assets or your case being dismissed. That’s why you should, at the very least, consult with a bankruptcy attorney before filing your petition. Even if you think you can’t afford an attorney, our firm offers free consultations. We also offer affordable rates and payment plan options, so bankruptcy might be more affordable than you thought. Call to get started today.   Arizona Offices: Mesa Location: 1731 West Baseline Rd., Suite #100 Mesa, AZ 85202 Office: (480) 448-9800 Email: [email protected] Website: https://myazlawyers.com/ Glendale Location: 20325 N 51st Avenue Suite #134, Building 5 Glendale, AZ 85308 Office: (602) 509-0955 Tucson Location: 2 East Congress St., Suite #900-6A Tucson, AZ 85701 Office: (520) 441-1450 Avondale Location: 12725 W. Indian School Rd., Ste E, #101 Avondale, AZ 85392 Office: (623) 469-6603 The post Arizona Bankruptcy Exemptions in Chapter 7 & Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Filings appeared first on My AZ Lawyers.

Summary: Firstar Bank, N.A. (pay close attention to the names) lent Linda Shaw funds to purchase her home subject to a Deed of Trust. When Ms. Shaw died, the property passed subject to her will to Theresa Hall, who took … N.C. Ct. of App: Wilmington Savings Fund Society v. Hall- Indorsement of Mortgage Notes and Ratification of Transfers by Loan Modification Read More »