BY Nino Hervias Gloria Guerra Over the past four years, the rise of Uber and other for-hire app-based car services — and the failure of New York City to properly regulate their operations — has decimated the value of taxi medallions. As medallion owners who have played by the city’s myriad rules, we have watched as upstart competitors have been allowed to operate under their own set of rules, creating the most unlevel of playing fields. The city’s negligence has also had some grave consequences for our common quality of life. Since regulators created very few barriers to entry for these newcomers, they of course stormed, in the tens of thousands, right into the heart of the city’s central business district, helping slow traffic to a crawl. Don’t take our word for this. Bruce Schaller, one of New York’s most reputable traffic engineers, has singled out Uber and other for-hire vehicles as the major cause of congestion in the central business district — and goes even further to call out the disrupter for undermining mass transit at the same time. And Schaller makes perfectly clear that taxis — whose numbers, unlike Ubers, are capped by law — have played no role in this burgeoning crisis. As a result of this Uber-inspired debacle, the city is now facing a congestion crisis so severe that Gov. Cuomo is making solving it a signature 2018 policy initiative of his administration. This week, he’s expected to reveal details of new plans to charge vehicles for traveling into the heart of Midtown. Our fear, though, is that in looking to solve the growing problem, the state will advance policies that fail to get at the heart of the matter — and that will, in the process, further victimize medallion owners. Even the policy advice offered by someone as sophisticated as Schaller is concerning. In the face of his clear-eyed evaluation of how Uber has caused a traffic nightmare, Schaller beats a hasty retreat from the obvious conclusion: that Uber and its imitators need to be reined in through regulations that restrict their boundless proliferation, and that treat all of these e-hails — as the European Union is now moving to treat them — just like any other taxi company. Instead, he suggests that Uber and Lyft self-regulate by modifying their algorithms to cut down on the cruising times of their cars in the central business district. Meantime, even after acknowledging that taxis have not contributed to this growing mess, Schaller proposes a mandate on yellow-cab owners — already the most highly regulated group in the transportation industry — “to reduce time spent in the central business district.” This is consistent with a false evenhandedness we now commonly hear, one that would place the same fees on both taxis and Ubers — as if both segments are now equally regulated and equally responsible for congestion. That’s just not so. Back in 2012, Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed adding 2,000 new medallions for wheelchair-accessible taxis — bringing the overall medallion total to its current level of 13,587. The proposal needed both Albany’s approval and triggered a full environmental review. Through these sales, the city hoped to generate more than $1 billion. Cuomo gave his approval and the deal went through — even though the environmental review determined that the additional cabs would create a significant negative impact on the environment. Compare and contrast. There are now some 68,000 Uber cars total, and the city’s regulators tell us that they are licensing an additional 2,000 such cars every month — without a single environmental review. Taxi medallion owners have paid dearly into the municipal system — and continue to pay every year with a panoply of fees, one example being the 50 cents a ride that goes directly to the MTA; Ubers are exempt from paying that fee. Yellow cabs do so because the city said this was in exchange for the exclusive right to pick up street hails — a right that was abrogated when the regulators allowed the Ubers in with absolutely no limits. Now that it is clear where the blame lies for Midtown’s overly clogged streets, the false equivalency between taxis and Uber is not a reasonable path forward. Whatever the city and the state decide to do about congestion must be focused exclusively on the unregulated free riders and not the already fiscally obligated medallion owners, many of them immigrants, who have been paying into the system and following the rules for 80 years.  Hervias and Guerra are taxi medallion owners and members of the Taxi Medallion Owner Driver Association.© Copyright 2018 NY DailyNews.com. All rights reserved.

As our readers know, we’ve been representing many “underwater” taxi medallions (where the value of the medallion is less than the loan securing it).  And unfortunately for medallion owners, based on a recent auction, no relief with respect to taxi medallions increasing in value seems to be in sight.  Crain’s New York Business reportsthat an auction of seven medallions on January 16th organized by seller Aspire Federal Credit Union and Windels Marx (their law firm) never exceeded $200K per medallion.  A block of five medallions was sold to the stalking–horse bidder for $875K ($175,000 per medallion) and two additional medallions sold for $189,000 and $199,000.    Three years ago, these medallions sold for over $1,300,000- an approximately 90% drop in value. Jim Shenwick has represented taxi medallion clients with loans from Aspire. For information on how to manage the declining value of your taxi medallion, please contact Jim Shenwick.

As we’ve been writing about and problem solving in our practice, ride–hailing apps like Uberand Lyft are continuing to negatively impact taxi trips, revenue and “underwater” medallion owners.  And now these apps are leading to declines at one of taxis’ last strongholds-New York City airports.  The Wall Street Journal reportson a new analysis of Taxi and Limousine Commission data by Bruce Schaller, which found that “taxis’ share of pickups compared with app-based services at the airports has fallen from almost 100% in [June 2013] to 58% at LaGuardia and 53% at JFK [in June 2018],” even as demand for airport transportation grew.  Unfortunately, this is further unwelcome news for taxi medallion owners and will continue to suppress or reduce the value of NYC taxi medallions and compound the problem for owners of “underwater taxi medallions” (medallions whose value is less than the bank debt secured by those medallions). Owners of underwater taxi medallions are encouraged to speak with and meet Jim Shenwick.

In addition to Chapter 13, Chris Wesner’s law practice addresses Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. While Chapter 13 receives recognition as a process of reorganization, Chapter 7 Bankruptcy differs in that it is a process of liquidation. Chapter 7 is USUALLY the preferred chapter of bankruptcy when someone wants to completely eliminate all of their debts.  Repayment plans do not exist in this scenario as individuals concerned seek to completely absolve themselves of high levels of debt. Chapter 7 presents itself as a viable alternative in the wake of hospital bills and other unanticipated expenses. Usually, these debts are so high that sliding payment plans across several years do little to dwindle the amount owed. Chapter 7 Bankruptcy contains certain restrictions that may prod someone to consult an experienced, knowledgable attorney. While the law office assists with credit card debt, it cannot, under current bankruptcy laws, help clients clear their: Alimony Child support Student loans Debts related to fraudulent activities If maintaining assets like housing and cars remains a priority, individuals may qualify for reaffirmation agreements, but existing debt cannot be discharged or forgiven for 6 years. Even before starting the process of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, an individual must meet expectations to make some kind of payment to address existing debt. Additionally, the reaffirmation process may seem complicated and fraught with grave decisions as individuals and families decide which possessions they keep while returning certain goods to past and present creditors. The information above only outlines the key components of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. As everyone’s financial status and immediate life circumstances can dramatically differ, it’s advisable to speak with a skilled bankruptcy attorney to determine your needs and eligibility for certain programs, including Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. If you or someone you know in Troy, Ohio seeks assistance in filing for bankruptcy, call the Chris Wesner Law Office, LLC for an initial consultation. The post Qualified Guidance From a Troy, Ohio Bankruptcy Attorney Regarding Chapter 7 appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.

Our law firm specializes in representing taxi medallion owners whose medallions are “underwater” (meaning that the loan secured and collateralized by the medallion is greater than the value of the medallion) in workouts with banks and creditors and in bankruptcy filings.  We have noticed a trend recently where many medallion owners who own underwater taxi medallions have transferred their house or primary residence to a trust for no money or other consideration for the transfer.  There appear to be two reasons for these transfers or conveyances: (1) estate planning (where the owner of the house wants future appreciation of the property to benefit a family member or third party); or (2) the property owner (who also owns the underwater medallion) believes that by conveying the house to a trust, he or she is putting the house outside of the reach of the bank or creditor, who will not be able to foreclose on the house if there is a default on the medallion loan and litigation.In our experience, after meeting with and speaking to many medallion owner clients, we have determined that most of these transfers are not done for estate planning purposes, but to put the family house outside of the reach of the bank or other creditors (the second reason). A couple of observations need to be made with respect to the transfer of a house to a trust from a debtor/creditor and/or bankruptcy perspective.  If an individual borrows money from a bank, and their liabilities (monies owed to third parties) exceed their assets (property which they own), which is generally the fact pattern for an individual who wants an underwater taxi medallion, the transfer of the family house to a trust for no consideration (money or property) is a fraudulent conveyance. The statute of limitations (or look back period) is six years under the New York State Civil Practice Law and Rules and two years under the Bankruptcy Code.  In a fraudulent conveyance action, the bank or other creditor can commence an action in New York State courts to reverse the conveyance of the family house from the trust back to the individual, and there are many reported cases where creditors have commenced these actions and prevailed (seeUnited States v. Evseroff). Accordingly, a homeowner who makes this type of the transfer may have incurred legal fees and paid real estate transfer taxes and fees to accomplish nothing from a workout or bankruptcy perspective!In fact, besides accomplishing nothing and incurring legal fees and real estate transfer taxes and fees, the medallion owner/homeowner may actually end up in a worse position than the medallion owner that did not make the transfer, for two reasons: (1) if the trust owns a house and not an individual (who owns the underwater medallion), then the individual cannot claim the New York State homestead exemption which is currently $165,550 per spouse ($331,100 for a married couple) in the New York metropolitan area; and (2) a creditor may object to the discharge of their debt because of the fraudulent conveyance of the house to the trust (see Husky Int’l Elecs., Inc. v. Ritz).The New York State homestead exemption provides protection to New York State residents, to wit the first $165,550 in equity in a primary residence, after the payment or satisfaction of a consensual mortgage, is property of or belongs to the homeowner and is not subject to the reach of a creditor or a bank.  Additionally, the Bankruptcy Code provides that if a debtor made a fraudulent conveyance transfer prior to the date of the bankruptcy filing, this may be grounds to dismiss their bankruptcy case or deny them a discharge of certain debts.While there are techniques and approaches to undo or mitigate the damage done by these transfers or conveyances, it is better to not do them in the first place. We have however represented many individuals in mitigating the effects of these types of transfers.Prior to engaging in a workout with a bank or creditor, an individual or a debtor should and can engage in “asset protection planning” under New York State and federal bankruptcy law, but fraudulently conveying the family house to a trust to put the house outside of the reach of a creditor or a bank, does not work and is not valid asset protection planning.Our experience has shown that nervous or stressed out homeowners who own underwater taxi medallions may be doing themselves more harm than good by hastily conveying their house or other valuable assets to trusts or third parties for no consideration.  We would advise medallion owners to consult with competent, experienced attorneys or lawyers before engaging in such actions.  In fact, engaging in correct and meaningful asset protection planning can often times result in a successful workout with a bank or a successful discharge of debt in a bankruptcy filing.  

Written by Daniel Hart, former MAZURKRAEMER paralegal According to a working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research, 15.7% of NFL players have filed for bankruptcy within twelve years of retiring. (16% of retired NFL players go bankruptcy, Fortune.com).  A Sports Illustrated article reports that 78% of NFL players and 60% of NBA players face serious financial hardships after retirement. So why do so many athletes wind up bankrupt? We can begin by looking at the nature of how athletes earn their money.  Athletes typically hit their earnings peak within a few years of finishing school.  Across the three major American sports (MLB, NBA, NFL), the average career length is about 4.6 years.  Thus, the average athlete’s career is over at a young age, and the typical player is only at their peak earnings for an extremely short period.  Most never earn at the same level again.  In contrast, the typical American reaches their earnings peak usually decades after finishing school and has accumulated a lifetime of knowledge about how to handle finances by that point.  Some athletes may never think about an alternative career path for after retirement.  Without formulating a “retirement plan” or proper budget, young athletes blow through their money. Many athletes trust the wrong financial advisor.  When you earn as much as athletes, you become a natural target for smooth talking con-men in a nice suit.  When you do not have a business/finance background, it can be easy to get conned into investing in what seems like a grand plan that will return huge profits.  Stepping into an athlete’s mindset is important to understand why they would trust these people. First, an athlete is conditioned to listen to people with superior knowledge, like coaches and professionals who seem like savvy investors.  Second, an athlete’s mind-set is focused on big rewards (think: championships) with almost anything less as a failure.   Almost subconsciously, their goal is to hit a “home-run”(pun intended) with an investment.  Therefore, they may trust the wrong people and invest in seemingly glamorous, but unsound investments which, in the end, result in financial ruin.  As an example, Vince Young earned around $26 million in six seasons playing professional football.  Young trusted the wrong financial planner who reportedly misappropriated $5.5 million of his money.  Because of this and poor spending habits, Young was forced to file bankruptcy. Many athletes are attracted to the flashy investments.  Whether it’s a new technology or restaurant with their name on it, many will invest in ideas that do not have great long-term business models.  Look at local Pittsburgh kid, Dan Marino.  Marino earned millions as a NFL quarterback and studio analyst during the CBS pre-game show, “The NFL Today”.  However, he lost millions by investing in over 1.5 million shares in a company called, Digital Domain.  Digital Domain is widely known for producing the hologram of Tupac Shakur at the Coachella Music and Art Festival.  Digital Domain went bankrupt shortly after, and Marino was out nearly $14 million. Remember Curt Schilling.   He saw a future in video games and spent $50 million in creating his own company, 38 Studios.  Fast forward a couple years.  38 Studios filed bankruptcy, and Schilling is out his $50 million investment. An athlete’s personality traits and world view are almost unique.  On the field, a pro is aggressive, demonstrates raw emotion, and uses his inhibitions.  While these traits can make a winning athlete, they can make a poor businessman.    Also, athletes must have a focus on today or the very near future.  Just think about how a football player always talks about the next game and not the game five weeks from now.  In financial planning and investing, it is typically better to have a long-term approach. What are your personality traits?  What is your financial lense through which you view the money? French economist, Ruby Henry, describes the nature of athletes and how that affects their approach to financial situations.  His example is that of a three-point shooter in basketball.  That player must have a massive amount of confidence to continue to take that long-range, low percentage shot every game.  Applying that same confidence to a financial investment often does not work and can leads to financial ruin.  Former basketball star Antoine Walker earned over $100 million during his career.  He filed for bankruptcy in 2010.  As a basketball player, Walker had an insane level of confidence in his game, and, naturally, he applied this personality trait to his investments in multiple business ventures.  However, business investments are not the same as professional sports.  By taking such a confidence approach to business without having the knowledge base in finance/investing or proper advisors, financial disaster happened. Many athletes want, and are expected to live, a glamorous, exciting lifestyle.  Being in the limelight on the field means nightclubs, mansions, sports cars, and parties.  This harms them financially in two ways.  First, all of these items cost of lot of money.  Not only do many athletes spend exorbitant amounts on their cars and houses, but many feel the need to give back to the people that helped them get where they are now.  This means buying their family a house, purchasing their childhood friend a BMW, and investing in their uncle’s not-so-solid business plan to become a music producer.  Without having a proper budget, this is a simple way to blow through a million dollars.  Second, sound financial planning for your future usually involves NOT making the flashy choice.  Let’s face it, telling your friends that you just invested in a 25 year IRA with 8% yearly return on investment doesn’t exactly sound sexy. However, when you aren’t broke five years later, you will know you made the right choice. How can I take the examples of these athletes’ financial failures and apply them to my life?  Some may think that this does not apply to me as I do not live such an extravagant lifestyle.  However, many Americans find themselves in a similar situation as they face substantial debt, usually in the form of student loans.  First, create a budget and stick to it.  Avoid impulsive purchases.  Only sparingly purchase the luxury item (read: new pair of shoes, not new car).  Second, consult a proper financial advisor, preferably one who has references or works at a trusted investment company, and perform your due diligence before making large investments.  Finally, you need to plan for the long-term.  It’s not all about getting everything you want now.  By investing or saving money now, you will have plenty for down the road.  By following these simple steps, you can avoid the fate of a staggering amount of professional athletes.

There are many ways to defend a client against OVI (operating a vehicle while intoxicated). In other states, this is simply known as DUI. When we look at a case, there are ways to argue that the law enforcement agency’s representatives did not follow the proper procedures before arresting you for OVI. Some possibilities are as follows and could become part of your defense: You were profiled and you shouldn’t have been pulled over because you were operating safely and there were no obvious signs that your vehicle was not roadworthy and safe. You were going through a construction traffic pattern and the cops were just looking for people to pull over. You were coerced into taking a blood alcohol test (whether it was a breathalyzer device or a blood test) because you were afraid of going to jail. Officers shouldn’t use fear or coercion to get drivers to admit that they are driving while intoxicated or to undergo alcohol testing. At the Chris Wesner Law Office, we have encountered many other reasons why people have been unfairly targeted for OVI and subsequently arrested. This causes unnecessary stress on them and their families. It often seems that Ohio law enforcement officers have quotas, which means that they must write so many citations (including drunk driving charges) per shift. This is unfortunate and a potential way that law enforcement officers can harm society instead of helping them. We’ve even seen cases where a police officer or deputy has parked near a popular restaurant or bar and followed drivers home once they have left the establishment, which amounts to entrapment. While we support Ohio law enforcement officers who perform decent investigations, we also aggressively defend potential offenders who have been singled out and charged with OVI. We are here to help you present an effective defense on your day in court, to minimize fines and jail time, and to get your life back on track. For details, please contact us today. The post Defending OVI and DUI in Ohio appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.

Provided below is sales data from the sale of 19 taxi medallions as reported by the TLC for December 2017. The foreclosure sales prices for the four medallion sales (two at $750,000, one at $400,000 and one at $210,000) may be inflated because banks “credit bid” at those foreclosure sales (they bid up to the amount of their loan balances); therefore, they may not accurately reflect the fair market value of a taxi medallion. Similarly, the estate sales for $160,000 and no consideration may be too low a value because these sales reflect a sale by the estate of a taxi medallion owner who died, and those “desperate sellers” are selling for tax purposes or to quickly dispose of a depreciating asset.  Factoring out the foreclosure and estate sales, the fair market value of a medallion based on December sales data appears to be $185,000-$200,000.  Medallion owners with “underwater” medallions (where the loan balance exceeds the value of the medallion) should contact Jim Shenwick to discuss their options under the law. Price Type of Sale Number of Medallions $210,000 1 $210,000 Foreclosure 1 $800,000 3 $750,000 Foreclosure 2 $400,000 Foreclosure 1 $313,958.06 50% 1 $225,000 1 $200,000 1 $180,000 1 $180,000 1 $160,000 Estate 1 $158,000 1 $155,000 1 $0 Estate 1 $0 Estate 1 $0 Individual to LLC 1

   A bankruptcy court in Illinois denied the chapter 13 trustee's request to dismiss a case for exceeding the §109(e) debt limit, finding that when student loan debt caused the excess, then the case should proceed in chapter 13.  IN RE: CHRISTOPHER V. PRATOLA, Debtor., No. 17 B 11668, 2017 WL 6605264 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. Dec. 27, 2017).  The debtor had incurred $568,671 in student loan debt in obtaining his undergraduate degree and graduate degree in cinema and television production.  He had been paying $268/month the federal student loans on an income based repayment plan (IBR) requiring payments of 10% of his discretionary income since 2014, and the balance of the debt would be forgiven after 25 years of payments with no defaults.  His payment under a standard 10 year repayment plan would be $3,655.75.  Debtor is employed as a 'genius' at Apple making approximately $44,000/year.  He has modest assets and lives on a tight budget.  His schedules show $22,552 of credit card debt.  The trustee sought to dismiss solely based on the debtor being over the debt limit of §109(e), which sets an debt limit of $394,725 of non-contingent, liquidated unsecured debts.  The request was filed under §1307(c).  § 1307(c) provides, in pertinent part, that “on request of a party in interest ... after notice and a hearing, the court may convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 of this title, or may dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause ....”    The Court initially found that the IBR student loan was non-contingent.  The fact that a portion of the debt may be forgiven in the future does not make the debt contingent.  If the event giving rise to liability has already occurred, then the debt is noncontingent. In re McGovern, 122 B.R. 712, 716 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1989).  The Court then examined whether 'cause' existed for dismissal under §1307(c).  Cause is required for a dismissal or conversion under this section.  In re Nelson, 343 B.R. 671, 675 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2006).  While exceeding the debt limit is not included in the list of grounds to dismiss or convert, such list is not exclusive, and a number of court's have found this to be cause for such relief.  However, it is not an absolute ground for dismissal or conversion.  See United States v. Edmonston, 99 B.R. 995, 996 (E.D. Cal. 1989) (refusing to dismiss or convert case for ineligibility when the creditor moved to dismiss the case post-confirmation).  The debt limits were initially included in enactment of chapter 13 in 1978, and adjusted in 1994 and 1998, with 3 year automatic adjustments thereafter.  Congress created the debt limits to avoid having large business owners avoid the additional protections to creditors provided for in chapter 11.  The Report of the Committee on the Judiciary (the “Report”) relating to the bill that eventually became the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 explains that the debt limits are aimed specifically at large businesses:The bill places dollar limitations on the amount of debts of the proprietor who may use chapter 13, in order to prevent sole proprietors with large businesses from abusing creditors by avoiding chapter 11. The limits create an irrebuttable presumption that chapter 13 is inappropriate for businesses with more than $100,000 in unsecured debt or more than $500,000 in secured debt.H.R. Doc. No. 93-137, at 118-119 (1977).  Individuals with large amounts of student loan debts are not the types of debtors intended to be excluded by the debt limits in chapter 13.  Nor is there an advantage to student loan creditors of a debtor filing under chapter 11.  Many courts allow cure and maintain treatment of student loans in chapter 13.  Also, student loan debts are nondischargeable regardless of plan treatment.  Finally, upon emerging from chapter 13 debtors are more able to maintain payments on the student loans.  Further, the debt limits fail to account for the increasing portion of student loan debt held by individuals.   As educational debt has become increasingly difficult to discharge and chapter 13 debtors have been permitted to classify it separately in their plans, educational costs and debts have skyrocketed.Since 1978, the unsecured debt limit has increased at a rate of 7.6% per year on average. From 1978 to 2015, the cost of obtaining a post-secondary education increased at a rate of 20.7% per year on average. Digest of Educ. Statistics, Nat'l Ctr. for Educ. Statistics, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest.  And in just the last ten years, the total amount of public educational debt has increased at a rate of 16.5% per year on average. Portfolio Summary, Fed. Student Aid, https://studentaid.ed.gov.    Based on the statutory language, case law, and legislative history, as well as the practical realities of the case, the Court held that there is no cause for dismissal of the case.  Dismissal would not advance the Congressional intent in creating the debt limits, and would hinder the intent of allowing a fresh start to honest but unfortunate debtors.  Nor would dismissal advance the best interest of the creditors or the estate. If the case were converted to chapter 7 unsecured creditors would likely receive no dividend, and if converted to chapter 11 the fees and costs would be too cumbersome for a case such as his.  Continuing in chapter 13 would be in the best interest of the creditors and the estate.Michael Barnett www.hillsboroughbankruptcy.com  

Settle Debt and Regain Financial Freedom with an Attorney Facing debt head on with no concrete plan to pay it back is stressful and discouraging for most individuals. Unfortunately, many people have been in this position longer than necessary because they attempted to deal with their creditors on their own. However, hiring an attorney is beneficial because attorney’s will help you get your credit back on track and recover your credit score with their guidance. When should you hire an attorney for your debt? Regardless of how long you’ve been in debt, a debt attorney can help you find financial freedom. Essentially, it’s time to hire an attorney when your debt becomes overwhelming, and debt collectors are constantly calling, emailing, sending letters, or threats are being made to take legal action. Benefits of hiring an attorney  Ultimately, an attorney can educate you on how to stop creditors from constantly contacting you regarding your debt. One situation that is common is for creditors to sue their debtors. For this reason, it would be a good idea for you to feel secure with an experienced attorney to represent you in court. An attorney is also beneficial if you have a counterclaim against a creditor. For example, if the creditor violates a procedure, such as recording a call without your knowledge. Having an overwhelming amount of debt can be scary, but it is certainly not the end. Attorney’s specialize in helping individuals by ensuring they get the right treatment and experience a smooth process. Investing in an attorney is perfect if your debt is too overwhelming and you want to regain financial freedom as seamlessly as possible. Chris Wesner Law Office, LLC is dedicated to helping individuals and advocating on other’s behalf. We are here to provide you the support you want and the relief you need. The post Settle Debt and Regain Financial Freedom appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.