As Covid-19 forced lockdowns across the nation, unemployment skyrocketed, and many industries screeched to a halt as the Gross Domestic Product fell by more than 30 percent in the second quarter of 2020. Despite the bleak economic situation, some economic data like bankruptcies and delinquent mortgages would tell a different story if you took it […] The post The Effects of Covid-19 on Bankruptcy Filing and Mortgage Foreclosures appeared first on .

The short answer to this question is yes. Any individual can file a bankruptcy case on their own, even if they are married. In a situation like this, the other spouse is usually referred to as the “non-filing spouse” in the case, and their involvement is limited. However, whether or not filing without your spouse […] The post Can a Husband File For Bankruptcy Without Their Wife in Pennsylvania? appeared first on .

The timing of when a bankruptcy case might be the best option can vary depending on your circumstances, as well as intentions with your home. For those looking to stop the foreclosure process altogether and get their mortgage payments back on track, a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy is usually the method to do so, and the […] The post Should You File For Bankruptcy Before or After a Foreclosure in Pennsylvania? appeared first on .

 $600 stimulus (actually advance on tax credit) not subject to assignment/levy. Note, substantial condensing of section, but I believe this is the answer."SEC. 6428A. ADDITIONAL 2020 RECOVERY REBATES FOR INDIVIDUALS."(a) In General.--In addition to the credit allowed under section 6428, in the case of an eligible individual, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by subtitle A for the first taxable year beginning in 2020 an amount equal to the sum of--"(1)$600 ( $1,200 in the case of eligible individuals filing a joint return), plus"(2)an amount equal to the product of $600 multiplied by the number of qualifying children (within the meaning of section 24(c)) of the taxpayer."(b) Treatment of Credit.--The credit allowed by subsection (a) shall be treated as allowed by subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1."(c) Limitation Based on Adjusted Gross Income.--The amount of the credit allowed by subsection (a) (determined without regard to this subsection and subsection (e)) shall be reduced (but not below zero) by 5 percent of so much of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income as exceeds--"(1)$150,000 in the case of a joint return or a surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(a)),"(2)$112,500 in the case of a head of household (as defined in section 2(b)), and"(3)$75,000 in the case of a taxpayer not described in paragraph (1) or (2)."(d) Eligible Individual.--For purposes of this section, the term `eligible individual' means any individual other than--"(1)any nonresident alien individual,"(2)any individual with respect to whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable to another taxpayer for a taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the individual's taxable year begins, and"(3)an estate or trust."(e) Coordination With Advance Refunds of Credit.--"(1) In general.--The amount of the credit which would (but for this paragraph) be allowable under this section shall be reduced (but not below zero) by the aggregate refunds and credits made or allowed to the taxpayer under subsection (f). Any failure to so reduce the credit shall be treated as arising out of a mathematical or clerical error and assessed according to section 6213(b)(1)."(2) Joint returns.--Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary, in the case of a refund or credit made or allowed under subsection (f) with respect to a joint return, half of such refund or credit shall be treated as having been made or allowed to each individual filing such return."(f) Advance Refunds and Credits.--"(1) In general.--Each individual who was an eligible individual for such individual's first taxable year beginning in 2019 shall be treated as having made a payment against the tax imposed by chapter 1 for such taxable year in an amount equal to the advance refund amount for such taxable year."(2) Advance refund amount.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the advance refund amount is the amount that would have been allowed as a credit under this section for such taxable year if this section (other than subsection (e) and this subsection) had applied to such taxable year. For purposes of determining the advance refund amount with respect to such taxable year--"(A)any individual who was deceased before January 1, 2020, shall be treated for purposes of applying subsection (g) in the same manner as if the valid identification number of such person was not included on the return of tax for such taxable year, and"(B)no amount shall be determined under this subsection with respect to any qualifying child of the taxpayer if--"(i)the taxpayer was deceased before January 1, 2020, or"(ii)in the case of a joint return, both taxpayers were deceased before January 1, 2020."(3) Timing and manner of payments.--"(A) Timing.--"(i) In general.--The Secretary shall, subject to the provisions of this title, refund or credit any overpayment attributable to this subsection as rapidly as possible....d) Administrative Provisions.--(1) Exception from reduction or offset.--Any refund payable by reason of section 6428A(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by this section), or any such refund payable by reason of subsection (c) of this section, shall not be--(A)subject to reduction or offset pursuant to section 3716 3720A of title 31, United States Code,(B)subject to reduction or offset pursuant to subsection (c), (d), (e), or (f) of section 6402 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or(C)reduced or offset by other assessed Federal taxes that would otherwise be subject to levy or collection.(2) Assignment of benefits.--(A) In general.--The right of any person to any applicable payment shall not be transferable or assignable, at law or in equity, and no applicable payment shall be subject to, execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process, or the operation of any bankruptcy or insolvency law.

 FICO and Personal Bankruptcy When clients contact me for a consultation with respect to a personal bankruptcy filing, they will often ask how this could impact their FICO score. My reply is that the impact of a filing on their FICO score is of secondary importance; how to rehabilitate their credit after filing, is of primary importance.A wonderful article regarding one’s FICO score was recently published at Groovy Post and can be found at:     https://www.groovypost.com/explainer/what-is-a-fico-score-why-important/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily Reader’s with questions regarding FICO should review this post.Generally, a bankruptcy filing results from a “triggering event” such as being sued, losing a lawsuit and being subject to a judgment, failure to make a payment on credit cards, or defaulting on car lease payments. A person contemplating a bankruptcy filing usually has a FICO score of 550 to 650 and is unable to get credit.Accordingly, a chapter 7 bankruptcy filing would not lower the FICO score since it is already low. However, a chapter 7 bankruptcy filing can increase a person’s ability to obtain credit. Yes, let me repeat, a chapter 7 filing can make a person more credit-worthy. Why? For two reasons: 1) one can only file for chapter 7 bankruptcy once every eight years and 2) the bankruptcy filing cleans up one’s personal balance sheet: liabilities are discharged in and exempt assets are kept.Banks are aware of these factors and are thus more likely to loan money to a debtor after a bankruptcy filing with credit rehabilitation than before a filing.So how does a debtor rehabilitate their credit? 1) By getting a secured credit card, charging the card and repaying it, and finally asking the bank or credit card company to increase their credit limit. 2) By working, reducing their expenses, and saving as much money as possible.For these reasons, filing for bankruptcy and rehabilitating one’s credit is more important than the impact of chapter 7 bankruptcy on one’s FICO score.People with questions regarding FICO and credit rehabilitation should contact:Jim Shenwick, [email protected], (212) 541-6224 

Bankruptcy Substitutes and How You Can Settle Your Debts Understanding the Variety of Bankruptcy Substitute Options A lot of people think of bankruptcy as a last-resort option – mistakenly, since it can provide profound debt relief and help you restart your financial life faster than just about any other option. However, most people are persuaded by misconceptions about bankruptcy, and they look at other alternatives for resolving their debt before they are willing to talk to a bankruptcy attorney in Gilbert about their options. Here are some of the common options that many people pursue before they finally realize that talking to a Gilbert bankruptcy lawyer is going to be their best option: Negotiate Directly with Your Creditors If you are struggling to pay your bills, you may be juggling which creditors actually get paid each month. You may trade off, paying some one month and then others the next. Or you may just stop paying one while you take care of another until it’s paid off. Your creditors may be willing to lower the interest rate you pay or suspend your payments for a time if they know there’s a chance you might not be able to pay them at all. Call your credit card companies, medical provider, or bank lender to find out what’s possible. Some may even have programs that provide assistance if you are experiencing hardship. Just know that many creditors are going to be less willing to negotiate than you might think. They know they have legal options to get the debt paid, and they are going to want to get paid everything they can. Many are going to play hard ball, leaving you with few options. Work with a Credit Counseling Agency Credit counseling agencies can help you negotiate with your creditors, and they can give you advice about handling your debt and your finances. If you do file for bankruptcy eventually, you will have to take a credit counseling course anyway, so this is valuable information. However, credit counseling agencies are limited in what they can do to help you. Some organizations that pose as credit counseling agencies can actually take money from you without delivering results. They promise the world, but they just create more financial trouble for you. Do your research and tread carefully if you want to work with a credit counseling agency. Attempt a Debt Settlement You may hit the point that you can no longer maintain your credit cards. You want to cancel them instead of defaulting on them. You can call your credit card companies and offer a settlement. For example, you may say that you can pay $100 a month for a certain number of months. You may also be able to offer to pay only a portion of what you owe. The company may be willing to do this in order to get something for your debt rather than the nothing you might end up paying them if they refuse to settle. However, the debt will go on your credit report as a default, even if you do pay it off over time and even if you do pay all of it. But remember: Not all companies are going to be willing to even discuss this possibility with you. You’ll find after pursuing these options for settling your debts that your best option truly is bankruptcy. When you file for bankruptcy, you do not have to ask your creditors for permission. You don’t have to rely on their goodwill. You work directly with a Glendale bankruptcy attorney and judge to have your debts discharged completely or to determine what you can pay. The bankruptcy will be a hit to your credit initially, but you’ll be able to start rebuilding your credit quickly. In many cases, you’ll restore your credit more quickly by filing for bankruptcy in Glendale than you would by continuing to struggle with high credit balances and late payments. Call My AZ Lawyers today to talk with a bankruptcy attorney about your options for debt relief. We represent individuals seeking relief through Chapter 7 bankruptcy and Chapter 13 bankruptcy. We’ll analyze your finances and help you understand which bankruptcy option would give you the most benefits, then we’ll put together the paperwork to push the filing through as quickly as possible so you can start getting the debt relief you need. Call us in Phoenix today to schedule a consultation with a Gilbert bankruptcy attorney. 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 Bankruptcy Substitutes and How You Can Settle Your Debts appeared first on My AZ Lawyers.

The typical scenario in which this arises is that you will be notified by the police that there is a warrant out for your arrest.  In this situation, your next move is crucial – sit and wait, and the warrant will remain active, and in the event you are stopped in a vehicle for any […] The post What Should You Do if You Have a Warrant Out for Your Arrest in Pennsylvania? appeared first on .

     The 11th Circuit has chimed in on the fairly unusual procedure of granting retroactive relief from the automatic stay to permit otherwise prohibited conduct in Baker v. Bank of America, N.A., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 40615, Case No. 20-10780 (29 December 2020).  There had been five transfers of ownership in the property, all by quit claim deed, between 2006 and 2017, with Baker, the debtor in the 5th case, retaining an ownership interest after the first two transfers, and receiving complete ownership after the 5th transfer.  The property was subject to four prior bankruptcies just prior to the foreclosure sale on the home, all dismissed for failure to attend the meeting of creditors or file schedules, and this involved the fifth case, filed the day before the foreclosure sale.  Rather than cancelling the sale, as it had done for the four prior cases, Bank of America (BANA) proceeded with and completed the foreclosure sale.  Baker then sued BANA and the winning bidder at the sale for violating the automatic stay.  BANA requested, and obtained retroactive relief from the automatic stay, which decision was affirmed by the district court.   Baker initially challenged BANA's standing to appeal as is was not a secured creditor in the case.  To establish subject matter jurisdiction, a party must show it has a case or controversy.  This is shown by proving that the ligation has 1) an injury in fact 2) that if fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and 3) is likely to be redressed by a favorable decision.1  BANA's injury is shown by both the loan default and the request for sanctions against it, both directly traceable to Baker, and the order retroactively lifting the stay is likely to redress such injuries.  The 11th Circuit also found that BANA had party in interest standing.  11 U.S.C. §362(d) permits 'a party of interest' to seek relief from the automatic stay.  Such section specifically permits relief against real estate by a creditor whose claim is secured by such real estate if the court finds that the filing of the petition was part of a scheme to delay, hinder, or defraud creditors, involving either 1) the transfer of ownership in the property without such creditor's consent, or 2) multiple bankruptcy filings affecting the property.  A loan servicer is a party in interest in chapter 13 proceedings involving serviced loans.2  The Court found that the notices sent to Baker identifying BANA as the servicer of the mortgage established party in interest standing.  Next Baker argued that BANA improperly sought to reopen her case under 11 U.S.C. §350(b) after it had been dismissed with prejudice for again failing to cure deficiencies in her filing.  Specifically, she alleged that reopening under §350(b) is permitted only after a case has been closed under §350(a), and her case had been dismissed but not closed.  The 11th Circuit disagreed, finding that the court had dismissed the case, discharged the trustee, and ordered the case to be closed; which satisfied the plain terms of §350(a).  Baker then asserts that the bankruptcy court erred by not conducting an evidentiary hearing before granting BANA's request to reopen the case since her declaration in opposition to such request raised disputed issues of material fact regarding 1) her knowledge of the deed transfers and bankruptcy filings; 2) BANA's knowledge of the automatic stay and time of such knowledge; 3) her allegation that BANA's counsel advised her that the sale would be rescinded upon verification of the 5th bankruptcy filing, 4) BANA's delay in seeking relief from the stay, and 5) her allegation that she ceased to prosecute the 5th bankruptcy due to BANA's offer of a loan modification.  The 11th Circuit rejected this argument as Baker did not seek an evidentiary hearing until after the court granted the motion to reopen.  After the motion to reopen, the court scheduled a non-evidentiary hearing, which per local rules shall be restricted to the pleadings, affidavits and papers of record, and the argument of counsel; and which requires any documents intended for consideration must be filed and served no later than 4:30 on the 2nd business day prior to the hearing. A party challenging the absence of an evidentiary hearing must seasonably request such hearing in the lower court.3  Finally, getting to the heart of the case, the court found that retroactive relief from the automatic stay was justified under §362(d)(4).  The relevant question for such a ruling is whether the filing of the bankruptcy was part of a schedule to delay, hinder or defraud creditors that involved either a transfer of ownership of the property without the consent of the secured creditor or court approval, or multiple bankruptcy filings affecting such property.  The factual findings by the bankruptcy court supported such a finding, including determining that the case appears to be an extremely egregious situation given the multiple bankruptcy filings by multiple debtors, none of which appeared to be filed in good faith, and all of which were dismissed upon the debtors' collective failure to comply with the Bankruptcy Code and Rules.  Further, in imposing the 2 year stay relief provision in the dismissal order the court found a ten year failure to make payments on the loan, and that the delay caused by the multiple bankruptcy filings made such relief appropriate under §362(d)(4).  While §362(d)(1) requires a finding of cause to lift the stay, §362(d)(4) includes no such requirement.  Further such cause is found in the bankruptcy court's determinations. 1 Jacobson v. Fla. Sec'y of State, 974 F.3d 1236, 1245 (11th Cir. 2020). ↩2 Greer v. O'Dell, 305 F.3d 1297, 1302 (11th Cir. 2002).↩3 Sunseri v. Macro Cellular Partners, 412 F.3d 1247, 1250 (11th Cir. 2005) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1120 (1st Cir. 1989)).↩Michael BarnettMichael Barnett, PA506 N Armenia Ave.Tampa, FL 33609-1703813 870-3100https://hillsboroughbankruptcy.com

   The Southern District of Florida case affirmed Judge Cristal in Miami finding that the debtor could not claim a homestead exemption in property bequeathed to  them during the chapter 13 case, when they subsequently converted to chapter 7.  Rodriguez v. Mukamal, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181932, Case no 20-20583-Civ-Scola (1 October 2020).  The debtors had filed a chapter 13 case in 2013 listing their residence as homestead (unit 204) though not claiming the homestead exemption on schedule C.   Four months after filing the wife's mother passed away, leaving the debtors another unit in the same building (unit 106).  Debtors did not disclose this interest in the new unit until after converting their chapter 13 to a chapter 7 on 30 April 2019.  In the meantime, they continued to live in unit 204 until mid to late 2015 when it was sold at foreclosure, and they moved into unit 106.  Debtors amended schedule A/B after conversion and claimed unit 106 as exempt.  The trustee objected to the exemption, which objection was sustained by Judge Cristol in the bankruptcy court.  Judge Scola on appeal first noted that the new unit became property of the estate under 11 U.S.C. §541(a)(5)(A), under which property becomes property of the estate if a debtor acquires or becomes entitled to acquire an interest in property by bequest, devise, or inheritance.  As the Debtor-wife became entitled to acquire the unit upon her mother's death, within 128 days of the filing of the case, it is clearly property of the estate.  Pursuant to §348(f) the unit remained property of the estate upon conversion of the case to chapter 7.   The problem for the Debtors is that the availability of exemptions is determined as of the commencement of the case.1  As at the time of filing the Debtors had no interest in unit 106, it could not have qualified as homestead as of the date of filing, and their reference as of filing to unit 204 as their homestead precludes any finding that unit 106 could have qualified as homestead status at that time.  Debtors' argument on the equities was non-availing, in no small part due to their failure to disclose the inheritance of unit 106 as is required within 14 days of discovery of such interest under Rule 1007(h) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.  Instead they 1) proposed and obtained confirmation of a plan which failed to disclose such interest, 2) filed a false schedule as late as February 2019 failing to disclose the interest, 3) submitted income statements for 2015 which did not disclose that their mortgage payments of $1,600/month had been eliminated mid-year due to the foreclosure of the unit, and 4) did not submit income statements after 2015 which would have disclosed the elimination of the $1600/month mortgage payment which had been used to compute the chapter 13 plan payments.  Debtors and counsel must be aware of the intricacies of bankruptcy law and state exemptions.  In hindsight it likely would have been much better to 1) disclose the interest as required under the statute; and/or 2) refile a chapter 7 case with a new date to determine exemptions.1 See Carpenter v. Brown, 13-CV-61183, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112607, 2013 WL 4047017, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 9, 2013) (Moore, J.) ("Exemptions are determined as of the date of the filing of the petition in bankruptcy court.") (citing 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) which provides that an individual debtor may exempt from his bankruptcy estate "any property that is exempt under Federal law . . . or State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition.").↩Michael BarnettMichael Barnett, PA506 N Armenia Ave.Tampa, FL 33609-1703813 870-3100https://hillsboroughbankruptcy.com     

There are a number of reasons why a driver’s license may be suspended.  For example, maybe the driver was convicted of Driving Under the Influence charge; or, maybe a driver has too many points on his or her driver’s license; or maybe a driver has unpaid traffic tickets.  Whatever the reason may be, this Blog […] The post How to Restore Your Driver’s License in Pennsylvania appeared first on .