Beginning December 1, 2016, Proposed Federal Bankruptcy Rule, Fee and Form Changes will take effect.  The bulk of the changes will relate to litigation and notice provisions.  There will not be significant changes to the debtor’s bar.  There will be a $1.00 increase in filing fees for amending the creditor list or notice list.  The+ Read More The post New Bankruptcy Rule, Fee and Form Changes Effective 12-1-16 appeared first on David M. Siegel.

Here at Shenwick & Associates, many of our clients have concerns about tax debts. However, our bankruptcy practice is over 20 years old, and in our experience, tax debts are more easily resolved than student loan debts. In order to discharge taxes in bankruptcy, the taxpayer must show that: There is no fraudulent or willful evasion of the tax debt.The tax debt is at least three years old.A return for the tax debt was filed at least two years ago.The income tax debt was assessed by the IRS at least 240 days ago. Other options outside of bankruptcy also exist for resolving tax debts:Currently Not Collectible (CNC) Status. If the IRS agrees that you can't both pay your taxes and your reasonable living expenses, it may place your account in CNC (hardship) status. While your account is in CNC status, the IRS will not generally engage in collection activity (for example, it won't levy on your assets and income). However, the IRS will still charge interest and penalties to your account, and may keep your refunds and apply them to your debt. Before the IRS will place your account in CNC status, it may ask you to file any delinquent tax returns. If you request CNC status, the IRS may ask you to provide financial information, including your income and expenses, and whether you can sell any assets or get a loan. If your account is placed in CNC status, during the time it can collect the debt the IRS may review your income annually to see if your situation has improved. Generally, the IRS can attempt to collect your taxes up to 10 years from the date they were assessed, though the 10-year period is suspended in certain cases. The time the suspension is in effect will extend the time the IRS has to collect the tax.Offer In Compromise (OIC). An OIC allows you to settle your tax debt for less than the full amount you owe. It may be an option if you can't pay your tax liability, or doing so creates a financial hardship. The IRS considers your unique set of facts and circumstances: Ability to pay; Income; Expenses; and Asset equity. The IRS generally approves an OIC when the amount offered represents the most it can expect to collect within a reasonable period of time. However, to be eligible for an OIC, taxpayers must be current with all filing and payment requirements.Installment Agreement. If you're financially unable to pay your tax debt immediately, you can make monthly payments through an installment agreement. Before applying for any payment agreement, you must file all required tax returns. Tax cases and their resolution are challenging, even for experienced practitioners. For advice on how to deal with your tax debts, please contact Jim Shenwick.

People who win the lottery are often excited, and overwhelmed, with the possibilities. Unfortunately, that can lead them to make poor choices with the money they were given. When that happens they can even end up bankrupt in a short period of time. It’s easy to wonder how someone who wins millions can ever end up without any money, but it happens quite frequently. Understanding why can help people who aren’t lottery winners learn how to manage their money better, whether they’ve received a smaller windfall, they might be looking into bankruptcy, or they just need some incentive to start saving more and spending less. The Bankrupt Lottery Winner A lot of lottery winners become estranged from their family and friends. They can end up with depression and anxiety, along with alcohol, drug, or gambling problems. Often, what causes these issues is the pressure they feel from others who want to “borrow” from them, or who think they should be given money because they’re related or have known the person for a long time. Lottery winners can be bombarded with requests for help and money, and sometimes they are too generous with their gifts. They also become targets for scammers and thieves. Additionally, people who win the lottery may change the way they do things. They might start buying expensive clothing, or taking long trips. They could buy a bigger house and a nicer car, or choose flashy jewelry and expensive meals. Some give to charity, too, and do good things with their money, but no matter what they spend it on, they will still be losing money over time. That lower amount of money can lead to concerns over how fast the money is being spent, and it can also lead to denial that the money may be dwindling, both of which can spell problems for anyone who has big lottery winnings. The Examples are Numerous There are many lottery winners who have ended up broke, sometimes not very long after they got their winnings. Usually, it only takes a few short years for them to spend all of the money they received when they won, and then they’re right back where they started. Many of them are even worse off, because they quit their jobs and ended up in massive debt, in addition to spending everything they received. Callie Rogers won the UK lottery at 16, and spent 1.9 million pounds on parties, drugs, and plastic surgery. Today at 26, she’s worth about 2,000 pounds instead. Lisa Arcand used her one million dollar winnings to buy a house and a car, and then she opened a business. That seemed like a responsible way to do things, but the place didn’t do well and she ended up behind on her bills. The business had to close, and she lost everything. Suzanne Mullins is another lottery winner who really struggled, even though she won $4.2 million. With a sick son who accumulated over $1 million in medical bills and some bad decisions about taking out loans, she lost all the money she had been awarded. There are many more lottery winners who have experienced similar problems, and winning a lot of money isn’t always the help that people need. If you are facing bankruptcy or are concerned that your finances may be headed in that direction, the time to get some help is now. Contact the Chris Wesner Law Office to start getting your bankruptcy questions answered. The post Why Do People Who Win the Lottery Go Bankrupt? appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.

If you live in Ohio and are concerned about driving violations and points on your license, you’re not alone. Fortunately, there are ways to get points taken off of your license so they don’t raise your insurance rates and cause you other problems. With the right help and information, you will have the opportunity to reduce the number of points on your license as much as possible, or potentially keep those points off of your license altogether. Violations and Points in Ohio Speeding is one of the biggest reasons for points on your license. The Ohio formula for assessing points used to be complicated, but now it is simply based on how fast you were driving. You can get up to four points for speeding, and that comes from driving 30 mph or more over the posted limit. That can mean a license suspension, as well. More than 5 mph over the limit, or more than 10 mph over the limit if the limit is 55 mph or higher, can result in two points on your license. You can also get two points for failing to stop, an illegal turn, or running a red light, and four points for reckless driving or an underage OVI. It’s possible to get six points on your license all at once, for offenses such a fleeing and eluding, drag racing, not stopping if you cause an accident, OVI, or driving with a license that is already suspended. How Long Points Stay on Your Ohio Driver’s License When you receive points on your Ohio driver’s license, they stay there for a two-year period. During those two years, it’s important that you don’t accumulate 12 points. If that happens, you’ll end up with a license suspension that will last for six months. Appealing that suspension is possible, but you have to file your appeal before the suspension date begins. If you wait too long or don’t file your appeal correctly, you will not be able to do anything about the suspension once it starts. Remove Points From Your Ohio License You can have points removed from your driver’s license in Ohio, but there are limits to how many points can be removed and how often you can request this. A remedial driving instruction course can get two points removed from your license, and you have the opportunity to take the course five times. However, that five-time rule is a lifetime rule, and you can only take the course once every three years or more. Because of that, it’s often better to keep points off of your driver’s license than to try to get them removed. If you need help to remove points from your license, appeal a suspension, or try to keep points off of your license in the first place, contact the Chris Wesner Law Office, LLC today and start getting answers to your Ohio driver’s license questions. The post Points and Your License in Ohio appeared first on Chris Wesner Law Office.

The filing fee is $335.00 for a Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing.  The filing fee for a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case is $310.00.  Some attorneys will allow for the attorney’s fees to be paid over an extended period of time. The post What Does A Bankruptcy Cost? appeared first on David M. Siegel.

No Income Option I recently received an interesting call from young lady who was seeking bankruptcy protection to help with outstanding parking tickets. She had no income whatsoever, so she was not a candidate for chapter 13 bankruptcy which is the repayment plan over a 3 to 5 year period. However, she was interested in+ Read More The post Will Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Help With Parking Tickets? appeared first on David M. Siegel.

  In Watson v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. 16CV513-GPC(MDD), 2016 WL 6581846 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2016) the Court delved into the requirements for a request for information and qualified written request and what response is required.  In this non-bankruptcy case the plaintiff's filed a complaint alleging violation of Regulation X of  RESPA (the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act) and Regulation Z  of TILA ) the Truth in Lending Act) against Bank of America, Caliber Home Loans, and US Bank, N.A.   The allegations as to Regulation Z involved alleged violation of 12 C.F.R.§1026.41(d)(3) requiring disclosure of past payment history and the total amount of funds in suspense, and of 12 C.F.R. §1026.36(c)(3) requiring a statement reflecting the total outstanding balance due to pay the obligation in full as required.  The Court rejected these counts as the request for information (RFI) sent to the mortgage company failed to specifically request this information.  Qualified Written Requests are defined under Regulation X of TILA as a written correspondence, other than notice on a payment coupon or other payment medium supplied by the servicer, that––(i) includes, or otherwise enables the servicer to identify, the name and account of the borrower; and(ii) includes a statement of the reasons for the belief of the borrower, to the extent applicable, that the account is in error or provides sufficient detail to the servicer regarding other information sought by the borrower.12 U.S.C. § 2605(e)(1)(B).      A servicer is required to respond to QW Rs by a borrower only to the extent it seeks “information relating to the servicing of [the] loan.” 12 U.S.C. § 2605(e)(1)(A). Servicing is defined as “receiving any scheduled periodic payments from a borrower pursuant to the terms of any loan...and making the payments of principal and interest and such other payments with respect to the amounts received from the borrower.” 12 U.S.C. § 2605(i)(3).Watson v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. 16CV513-GPC(MDD), 2016 WL 6581846, at *5 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2016)     The duties of a servicer upon receiving a property QWR are as follows:         1.  Provide a written response acknowledging receipt within five days. 12 U.S.C. § 2605(e)(1); 12 C.F.R. § 1024.36(c).         2. The loan servicer must then respond to the inquiry not later than thirty days. 12 U.S.C. § 2605(e)(2); 12 C.F.R. § 1024.36(d).         3.  If a request is for the identity of and address or other relevant contact information for the owner or assignee of mortgage loan requires a response within 10 days. 12 C.F.R. § 1024.36(d)(2)(A); 12 U.S.C. § 2605(k)(1)(D).       The Court examined three RF Is to Bank of America. The first one dealt with the nature of the pooling and servicing agreement, and therefore did not relate to the servicing of the loan. thus was not a proper RESPA request.       The Second RFI requested the full name and address of the owner of the loan, as well as information on the investor, value, and appraisals.  While Bank of America responded, it only provided two inconsistent reinstatement figures on the loan. While the court noted that a number of the items requested (the note, mortgage, allonge, endorsement, assignment, investor information, indemnification agreement,  and value inforamtion) is not related to servicing, and not a proper subject for a RFI, the request for information as to the owner of the loan is property and must be provided.  Failure to do so gave rise to a cause of action.    The Third RFI requeste information as to modification options on the loan.  Under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.36 such information is not related to servicing, and therefore not a proper request.   Finally, the court examined a notice of error sent by the plaintiffs to the bank.  A notice of error is  any written notice from the borrower that asserts an error and that includes the name of the borrower, information that enables the servicer to identify the borrower's mortgage loan account, and the error the borrower believes has occurred....A qualified written request that asserts an error relating to the servicing of a mortgage loan is a notice of error for purposes of this section, and a servicer must comply with all requirements applicable to a notice of error with respect to such qualified written request.12 C.F.R. § 1024.35(a).  The servicer's requirements upon receipt of a notice of error are:  1) A Servicer must provide the borrower a written response acknowledging receipt of the notice of error within five days of receiving the NOE. 12 C.F.R. § 1024.35(d). 2)  Servicers are required to respond to the NOE by either correcting the error and providing the borrower with written notification of the correction, effective date of the correction, and contact information or conduct a reasonable investigation and provide the borrower with a written notification about the investigation. Id. § 1024.35(e)(1). 3)  The servicer must comply with these requirements no later than seven days after the servicer receives the NOE. 12 C.F.R. § 1024.35(e)(3)(i)(A). Watson v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. 16CV513-GPC(MDD), 2016 WL 6581846, at *9 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2016)  To allege a violation of 12 C.F.R. § 1024.35(e), Plaintiff must allege facts of when the letter was sent, to whom it was directed, why it was sent, and the contents of the letter so that it may determine if the letter qualifies as a NOE.  Since the plaintiff failed to assert these details, this count was dismissed.  The decision goes on to substantial additional analysis of other counts and other defendants.Michael Barnett.  www.tampabankruptcy.com

Overview In this bankruptcy case study, we are going to analyze the financial situation for Ms. L., who resides in Chicago. She resides on Woodland Park Avenue of the East side of the city. She filed a chapter 13 bankruptcy back in 2006. Thus, she is eligible for either a chapter 7 bankruptcy case or+ Read More The post This Is The Bankruptcy Case Study For Miss L., Living In Chicago appeared first on David M. Siegel.

I just spoke to a young lady this morning who cosigned on a vehicle. The other person on the hook for the vehicle debt has just filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy. The vehicle is not going to be reorganized through the chapter 13. Thus, the auto finance company has the right to modify the automatic+ Read More The post Co-Signed Auto Debt In A Chapter 13 Can Get Very Tricky appeared first on David M. Siegel.

   A case which could cause problems for Debtors came out of the 2nd Circuit this week.  In STEPHEN W. RUPP, Tr. of the Chapter 7 Bankr. Estate of Teresa Lynn Pearson, Appellant, v. TERESA LYNN PEARSON, Appellee., No. 15-4191, 2016 WL 6576390 (10th Cir. Nov. 7, 2016) the chapter 7 trustee sought to dismiss a chapter 7 case on the basis that the confirmed plan in a prior dismissed chapter 13 case required the debtor to turnover a portion of the tax refund, and failed to do so.  The chapter 7 trustee based the complaint on 11 U.S.C. 727(a)(2)(A) which provides for denial of the discharge if a debtor with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor...has transferred..property of the debtor within one year before the filing of the petition.  Despite no answer being filed by the Debtor, the bankrutpcy court dismissed the action with prejudice for failure to allege facts showing fraudulent intent.  The disctrict court affirmed.  The 2nd Circuit reversed finding that it is sufficient to allege an intent to hinder or delay creditors, without any showing of fraud.  It appears the debtor did not participate in the appeals.  The fact pattern did not help the debtors in this case.  The debtor and her spouse had filed nine bankruptcy petitions under chapter 7 and chapter 13 from 1993 through 2013.  The plan in the 2012 chapter 13 case provided that the debtor could retain $2,000 of her 2012 refund with the surplus to be paid to the bankruptcy estate.  She received a refund of $4,829 but did not turn over any funds to the estate, instead spending the funds on onoexempt personal items (living expenses, bills, and her children).  The court dismissed the chapter 13 case and the debtor filed chapter 7 thirteen days later.  To prevail on a complaint under  §727(a)(2)(A) the objector must show by a preponderance of the evidence that 1) the debtor transferred, removed, concealed, destroyed, or mutilated, 2) property of the estate 3) within one year prior to the bankruptcy filing, 4) with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor.  Gullickson v. Brown (In re Brown), 108 F.3d 1290, 1293 (10th Cir. 1997).     The 2nd Circuit looked at the history as elucidated in the trustee's complaint, showing a pattern of filing chapter 13 cases followed by chapter 7s.  At the time of the filing of the last prior chapter 13 case, the debtor was ineligible for discharge under chapter 7 under §727(a)(8).  When the new chapter 7 was filed after dismissal of the chapter 13 it had been exactly 8 years since she last filed a chapter 7 petition, and thus was eligible for a chapter 7 discharge. The Court found that it would be a natural inference from this history that when the 2012 chapter 13 she had no intention of complying with it's requirements except to delay the creditors until she was eligible to get a chapter 7 discharge.  The Court thus found the complaint adequately alleged that the failure to turnover the tax refund was part of a scheme to hinder and delay creditors.  The bankruptcy and district courts had focused on the absence of badges of fraud, but the 2nd Circuit found that such badges were not the exclusive means of establishing fraud.  Further, the trustee does not have to show fraud, if actions taken to hinder or delay creditors are shown.  The lower courts also noted the failure of the complaint to negate the possibility of an innocent explanation of the debtor's behavior.  But an innocent motive can coexist with the intent to hinder or delay creditors.  Here the debtor spent the refund less than six months after filing a chapter 13 plan stating she could provide for her needs and still comply with the requirements of the plan. The dismissal of the complaint was reversed and the case remanded.Michael Barnett.  www.tampabankruptcy.com