4th Cir.: Mohamed v. Bank of America- Electronic Funds Transfers Act Ed Boltz Sat, 03/09/2024 - 19:14 Summary: Mohamed sued Bank of America alleging violations of the EFTA, particularly regarding unauthorized electronic fund transfers. The case centered on whether Bank of America properly provided notice of the right to cancel preauthorized electronic fund transfers, as required by the EFTA. Mohamed argued that the bank's notice did not comply with the law. The Court of Appeals found in favor of Mohamed, ruling that Bank of America's notice did not adequately inform consumers of their rights under the EFTA  and by failing to provide adequate fraud prevention and investigation. Further,  a "covered account" under the EFTA  includes a prepaid account, including one loaded with unemployment assistance related to the pandemic such as a government benefit account. Commentary:  Some of the main protections under the EFTA include: Disclosure Requirements: Financial institutions must provide consumers with clear and comprehensive disclosures regarding the terms and conditions of electronic fund transfer services, including fees, liability for unauthorized transactions, and procedures for resolving errors. Limits on Liability for Unauthorized Transfers: The EFTA limits a consumer's liability for unauthorized electronic fund transfers, provided the consumer promptly reports the unauthorized activity to the financial institution. Typically, the consumer's liability is capped at $50 if the report is made within two business days of discovering the unauthorized transfer. Error Resolution Procedures: Financial institutions are required to establish procedures for consumers to report errors related to electronic fund transfers, such as incorrect amounts or unauthorized transactions. Upon receiving a report, the institution must investigate and resolve the error promptly. Right to Stop Payments: Consumers have the right to stop preauthorized electronic fund transfers by notifying the financial institution at least three business days before the scheduled transfer date. Prompt Crediting of Deposits: Financial institutions must promptly credit electronic deposits, such as payroll direct deposits or electronic benefit transfers, to the consumer's account on the day the funds are received. Fair Treatment of Consumers: The EFTA prohibits unfair or deceptive practices by financial institutions in connection with electronic fund transfer services, ensuring consumers are treated fairly and transparently.These protections may apply in Chapter 13 cases, potentially in regard to electronic payments to Chapter 13 trustee but perhaps also in electronic transfers made by Chapter 13 Trustees,  as the definition in the EFTA of a consumer's account  could also include money that the Trustee holds, the definition of a financial institution  could include Trustees themselves and the phrase preauthorized electronic fund transfer  arguably includes those authorized under a voluntary Chapter 13 repayment plan.   Could this mean that  the EFTA  apply and  provides Chapter 13 debtors some degree of continuing control to stop payments?  Similarly,  does the EFTA  require prompt crediting of payments received,  again either from the debtor to the Chapter 13 trustee or from the Chapter 13 Trustee to a creditor? To read a copy of the transcript, please see: Blog comments Attachment Document mohamed_v._bank_of_america_1.pdf (157.45 KB) Category 4th Circuit Court of Appeals

Bankr. M.D.N.C.: In re Randolph Hospital I & II- Motion for Summary Judgment and Expert Witnesses in a Bench Trial Ed Boltz Sat, 03/09/2024 - 18:47 Summary (MSJ): The Liquidating Trustee   sought judgment on his claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unfair or deceptive acts  or practices against   Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital Operating Corporation ("Cone Health),  with both parties seeking summary judgment.   Ranging over 76 pages,  the bankruptcy court opinion regarding the numerous causes of action variously granted or denied the parties' Motions for Summary Judgment,  with specific order also attached. Summary  (Expert Witness): The bankruptcy court excluded portions of an expert witness's testimony  to the extent that it involved conclusions as  to a parties' legal responsibilities  or its alleged breaches of the agreement,  but otherwise overruled in all other respects.  Fed. R. Evid. 702 (2023),  specifically provides that:  A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if the proponent demonstrates to the court that it is more likely than not that:  (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and  (d) the expert’s opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the facts of the case. .    The application of Rule 702 here was "relaxed"  as  this case was to be decided by the bankruptcy judge,  rather than by a jury,  so "there is less need for the gatekeeper to keep the gate when the gatekeeper is keeping the gate only for himself."  . See, e.g., United States v. Wood, 741 F.3d 417, 425 (4th Cir. 2013) (quoting United States v. Brown, 415 F.3d 1257, 1269 (11th Cir. 2005)). Commentary: While reading 94 pages about the contractual fights in a hospital bankruptcy is not immediately pertinent for most consumers attorneys,  the second of these opinions does  examine in detail  the allowance of expert witnesses in bankruptcy cases,  with it appearing that broad discretion, almost up to the point an expert providing legal opinions, should be given in bench trials, whether  medical systems experts or, as an example more likely in a consumer context,  for forensic mortgage accountants. Additionally useful is the discussion of the waivers of breaches of contract,  which the bankruptcy court held requires: The waiving party is the innocent, or nonbreaching party;  The breach does not involve total repudiation of the contract so that the nonbreaching party continues to receive some of the bargained-for consideration;   The innocent party is aware of the breach; The innocent party intentionally waives his right to excuse or repudiate his own performance by continuing to perform or accept the partial performance of the breaching party. See Wheeler v. Wheeler, 263 S.E.2d 763, 766-767 (N.C. 1980).  In consumer cases,  the question of waiver  touches on,  for example,  whether a reaffirmation is required. A waiver  of a breach of contract,  including perhaps the acceptance of payments after receiving notice of a breach of contract due to the filing of bankruptcy,  could remove any event of default and make any reaffirmation an impermissible and unnecessary "undue hardship".    Blog comments Attachment Document robichaux_v._cone_22-02002_-_order_re_objection_to_expert_reports.pdf (621.43 KB) Document randolph_cone_msj.pdf (403.22 KB) Category North Carolina Bankruptcy Cases Middle District

Law Review: Ponoroff, Lawrence- Chapter 13: Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off Ed Boltz Sat, 03/09/2024 - 18:40 Abstract: Courts cannot agree on much of anything about chapter 13, and legislators cannot agree and are confused over what to do about it. This state of affairs benefits no one and shows no signs of abating. So, in this Article, I propose to throw in the towel by imagining a world without chapter 13. Spoiler alert: although I am not superstitious, with just a few tweaks and tucks to chapter 7, I think the Bankruptcy Code might just be better off operating like a high-rise elevator that goes directly from floor twelve to floor fourteen. I will lay it out and readers can decide for themselves if they are prepared to become anti-choice. For me, in the words of the legendary Louis Armstrong, “and I think to myself what a wonderful world” it would be without chapter 13. Commentary: Perhaps the most glib (it's ever so  fun to quote  the lyrics of jazz standards!) and uninformed dismissal of Chapter 13 that I have  read.  The author, naive to the point of foolishness, suggests that debtors could save homes from foreclin Chapter 7   "by reaffirming the debt so long as the bank is amenable", but if banks were amenable  the debtor could have avoided foreclosure.   Further,  to the extent that my commentary might seem unnecessarily insulting,  the comments that "consumer bankruptcy attorneys may rush to the barricades to resist"  because of  their "avarice"  seem  to perpetuate the irrational and knee jerk hostitly all too common in the ivory tower.  Perhaps that arises because consumer debtor attorneys do not,  unlike their $2500 hour Chapter 11 colleagues,  endow positions at law schools,  underwrite self-serving scholarship,  or pay for lavish cocktail parties at bankruptcy conferences.   That disregard inaccurately persists with the statements in this article that Chapter 11 cases can "bear the overhead of litigating [bankruptcy] issues",  when in fact far more bankruptcy issues (impacting all chapters) are raised and litigated, including on appeal as far as the Supreme Court, by  consumer attorneys,  almost always without charge,  than by corporate debtor attorneys.  See,  e.g., Bankruptcy and the US Supreme Court by Ronald J. Mann. Lastly,  for those fixated on the  discharge being the sole gauge of the success of any bankruptcy,  leaving aside unlikely changes such as the adoption of Senator Warren's Consumer Bankruptcy Reform Act or Prof.  Ponoroff's myopic suggestion to simply "scrap"  Chapter 13,  there are immediate options that bankruptcy courts,  trustees and the USTP (and Bankruptcy Administrator)  could take to increase that metric,  perhaps without any legislation. Most Chapter 13 cases fail due to delinquencies in  plan payments, with Trustees moving, pursuant to  11 U.S. Code § 1307,   to dismiss.  That section,  however,  also  provides that any party in interest can move to  convert a case  if that  "is in the best interests of creditors and the estate".  Obviously,  liquidating an estate if there are non-exempt assets is in the best interest of creditors,  but arguably the discharge of debts is also in the interest of creditors when there are neither assets or income that could be obtained outside of bankruptcy.  Stopping creditors from expending their resources in pointless debt collection is to their benefit.  (Except perhaps for those mythical "amenable"  banks mentioned  elsewhere by Prof. Ponoroff.)  Further,  by reducing the need for the debtor to refile another bankruptcy,  paying the avaricious consumer debtor attorneys again,  that preserves their ability to pay secured creditors.  (11 U.S. Code § 1307 does not show a preference for secured or unsecured creditors.) Now obviously,  many Chapter 13 debtors  do convert their failing plans to Chapter 7,  but a simple logistical fact,  that many academics seem unaware of, is that a debtor must affirmatively convert their case to Chapter 7 and, absent the specific instruction,  their attorney cannot take that action,  no matter how advisable,  unilaterally.  In the face of a failing plan,  many, many consumer debtors simply disappear and become non-responsive.   But just as a consumer debtor's attorney cannot seek conversion absent instruction,  the attorney also cannot oppose  conversion absent instruction. So if instead  Chapter 13 trustees and the USTP (and Bankruptcy Administrators)  more uniformly and routinely sought conversion of cases to Chapter 7 (still subject to the debtor's absolute right to voluntarily dismiss a Chapter 13 case)  those debtors would actually get a discharge.  (A generous reading of 11 U.S. Code § 341 would even find no requirement for a second First Meeting of Creditors.  What questions was the Chapter 13 Trustee derelict in failing to ask previously?) The author here does admittedly draw attention to one of the largest issues with conversion as a solution,  viz. whether the post-petition appreciation in value in assets,  particularly homes,   can be sold by a Chapter 7 trustee.  This problem arises   only because of unmentioned avarice of  Chapter 7 Trustees  (as always,  I stand in favor of finding ways to pay Chapter 7 Trustees more for "No Asset" cases) and because it's  under the nose of the bankruptcy court.   But how often does anyone care when a debtor  sells their house for more money after receiving a discharge and closure of their case?  Never.  But Chapter 13 debtors,  who had the temerity to take this "honorable" alternative,  are punished for this  under a draconian interpretation of § 348 and an overly broad reading of the difference from Schwab v. Reilly between exemptions for dollar amounts and those for a Ding an Sich  (to get all Kantian here).   The likelihood of any of these alternatives,  however,  is vanishingly small, especially compared with the certainty that ill-informed academics will continue to write unhelpful screeds about the failures of Chapter 13.   To read a copy of the transcript, please see: Blog comments Attachment Document chapter_13_let_s_call_the_whole_thing_off_1.pdf (664.88 KB) Category Law Reviews & Studies

Few things are more stressful than getting a notice that your property is going to be sold at a sheriff’s sale. Unfortunately, many people are unaware of how much time they have before the sale. Fortunately, in Pennsylvania, you must be given time to address the situation before the sheriff’s sale. In some cases, this can be as short as a month. For this reason and many others, you need a legal team that understands the complexities inherent in these cases. We can help you form strategies to keep your property or arrange another agreement that satisfies your debts. Our firm will act as a barrier between you and your lenders, negotiating on your behalf and fighting to protect your rights. For a free case evaluation with our Pennsylvania bankruptcy lawyers, contact Young, Marr, Mallis & Deane at (215) 701-6519. How Much Notice Am I Entitled to Before My Property is Sold at a Pennsylvania Sheriff’s Sale? Sheriff’s sales in Pennsylvania are public auctions where properties subject to foreclosure or tax delinquency are sold. These sales serve as mechanisms for creditors to recover debts through the seizure and sale of a debtor’s property. However, you are entitled to be notified before your property is sold off. Our Pennsylvania property attorneys can help you determine how long you have before the sale and how to contest it. The following are the notice requirements that must be followed in a Pennsylvania sheriff’s sale: Act 91 Notice First, lenders are obligated to send an “Act 91” notice to the property owners at least 30 days before initiating a foreclosure action. This notice serves as an alert to the owners regarding the impending foreclosure and must provide them with relevant information about available assistance programs that can help them avoid foreclosure. Notice of Sale 231 Pa. Code § 3129.2 stipulates that the notice must be given through a combination of handbills, written notice to all interested parties, and publication in a newspaper of general circulation and a legal publication, if available. The timing and specifics of the notice may vary depending on local rules, but generally, notices must be posted and published several weeks in advance of the sale. This ensures that interested parties are aware of the sale and have ample time to prepare for it. Time Frame for the Sale Most importantly, property can be sold at a sheriff’s sale within a wide timeframe. However, this period typically begins 30 days after the judgment date but can last up to 5 years. This means that the property owner might have up to 5 years to pay off any outstanding debts or obligations before the sale takes place. Distribution of Proceeds After the property has been sold, the sheriff’s office is required to prepare a schedule of the proposed distribution of the proceeds within 30 days. This schedule usually outlines how the proceeds from the sale will be distributed among the parties involved in the case, including any outstanding debts or liens to be settled. What Property Can Be Sold at a Sheriff’s Sale in Pennsylvania? Unfortunately, the debtor’s personal and real property can be auctioned at a sheriff’s sale in Pennsylvania. However, some types of property are more in jeopardy of being sold than others. The following will help you understand what property could be in danger of being sold off if you receive a notice for a sheriff’s sale following foreclosure: Real Estate Properties One of the most common types of property sold at sheriff’s sales in Pennsylvania is real estate. This category typically includes residential homes, commercial buildings, and vacant land. The sale of real estate properties typically follows a judicial mortgage foreclosure process, initiated by creditors such as banks or financial institutions when your mortgage goes unpaid. This means that the bank or creditor filed suit against you and the sale was ordered by a judge. Keep in mind that this decision can be made by the court if you are absent from the hearing to address the foreclosure. Tax-Delinquent Properties Properties with unpaid taxes also frequently appear at sheriff’s sales, offering municipalities a path to recover unpaid property taxes. These sales are particularly important for local governments as they serve as a source of funding for public services. Properties sold for this reason range from residential homes to commercial establishments and undeveloped land. Personal Property Sheriff’s sales can extend beyond real estate to include personal property as well. Personal property can include a wide range of tangible assets, like vehicles, electronic devices, machinery, jewelry, furniture, and other valuable items. These sales will then be used to satisfy your outstanding debts or judgments against you. Unfortunately, this process provides ample opportunity for interested buyers to acquire your assets at a discount. Business Assets In cases involving business bankruptcies or judgments against businesses, assets of the business may be sold at a sheriff’s sale. These assets can include office furniture, inventory, company vehicles, and even intellectual property. The sale of business assets typically serves as a means to repay creditors or satisfy judgments awarded in civil litigation. Unique and Miscellaneous Properties Sheriff’s sales may occasionally feature unique or miscellaneous properties that do not neatly fit into the categories mentioned above. This can include items like boats, artwork, and collectibles. The inclusion of such items highlights the diversity of assets that can be liquidated through the sheriff’s sale process. Can I Contest a Sheriff’s Sale in Pennsylvania? Those facing the loss of their property through a sheriff’s sale could have several potential avenues to contest the sale or, at least, mitigate its consequences. For instance, filing for bankruptcy is one of the most immediate methods to halt a sheriff’s sale. Bankruptcy can stop a sheriff’s sale entirely if filed before the sale occurs, providing that the debtor cannot pay off the debt or negotiate other arrangements. If you file for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy, the automatic stay it provides should halt all collection activities, including foreclosure and sheriff’s sales. A short sale is another strategy for homeowners seeking to avoid the worst repercussions of a sheriff’s sale. In a short sale, the homeowner sells the property for less than the amount owed on the mortgage with the lender’s approval. While not directly contesting the sheriff’s sale, a short sale can be a proactive approach to satisfy the debt for less than the full amount. The advantage of a short sale is its potential to limit the financial damage to your credit score compared to the impact of a foreclosure. Moreover, it provides a measure of control over the process, allowing you to be actively involved in the sale of your property. Our Pennsylvania Property Lawyers Can Provide the Guidance You Need Before Your Sheriff’s Sale Occurs Our Philadelphia bankruptcy attorneys at Young, Marr, Mallis & Deane can provide a free case review when you call us at (215) 701-6519.

N.C. Ct. of App.: Maxsiq v. Howard- Severability of Settlement Terms Stafford Patterson Fri, 03/08/2024 - 19:41 Summary: The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, which had granted summary judgment to the defendants, dismissing the plaintiff's claims for unjust enrichment and conversion. The case centered on the enforceability of a Memorandum of Settlement (MOS) after settlement negotiations failed, specifically whether a $1,000,000 initial payment made by the plaintiff to the defendants was refundable. The court held that the initial payment provision created a standalone agreement, independent of the MOS, and was non-refundable "in any event" according to its terms. The court also found that the initial payment was supported by consideration, making it an enforceable contract, and dismissed the plaintiff's claims accordingly.  To read a copy of the transcript, please see: Blog comments Attachment Document maxisiq_v._howard_1.pdf (125.56 KB) Category NC Court of Appeals NC Courts

Small-business owners carry bigger debt loads than they did pre-pandemic   Biz Journals is reporting that Small Business owners are now carrying bigger debt loads that they did pre-pandemic. The increased debt load combined with higher interest rates is proving to be a "toxic mix." At Shenwick & Associates, we are witnessing a significant rise in business bankruptcies, personal bankruptcy filings, and workouts.The Biz Journal article can be found athttps://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/news/2024/03/07/small-business-debt-loans-federal-reserve-interest.htmlJim Shenwick, Esq  917 363 3391  [email protected] Please click the link to schedule a telephone call with me.https://calendly.com/james-shenwick/15minWe held individuals & businesses with too much debt!

Bankr. E.D.N.C.: Nationwide Recovery Judgment v. Tyndall- Pleading Standards for Allegations of Fraud Ed Boltz Thu, 03/07/2024 - 16:52 Summary: National Judgment Recovery ("NJR")  brought an action to determine  that the $93,159.71  fraudulent conveyance judgment against Tyndall,  as a "net winner"  in the ZeekRewards  pyramid scheme case,  was nondischargeable under  11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) as actual fraud. After permitting NJR to amend its original complaint to avoid a motion to dismiss,  the bankruptcy court found that the amended complaint finding did adequately allege "actual fraud."  Following NJR v. Sheppard,  the bankruptcy court  held that was not,  however,  sufficient as NJR failed to :allergy facts that would show [Tyndall] fraud with the requisite fraudulent intent."  Neither the amended complaint  nor the underlying judgment  (attached)  sufficiently alleged that  Tyndall "helped create the Ponzi scheme or materially furthered and aided its advancement."   Nor was the "impossibly high"  rate of return alone a sufficient badge of fraud. This contrasts with NJR v. Reefe,  where the defendant was shown to have clearly "built the base for her part of the pyramid... using knowingly fraudulent means." Commentary: This case is certainly useful  for people that end up filing their own bankruptcies  in the wake of fraudulent conveyance actions against them by Trustees  in other cases,  since here  Tyndall had at least one badge of fraud  with the related  stink of a Ponzi scheme.  Most other cases are far more innocently cases where someone accepted funds from a soon-to-be debtor.   Chapter 7 Trustees might be mindful of this in negotiating settlements of these potential actions and Chapter 13 Trustees,  when making demands that Debtors fund  plans to compensate creditors  for transfers should also  factor this into any Best Interest of the Creditors analysis. It would also be interesting to hear from any of the dozens of North Carolina attorneys involved in  the underlying Zeekerewards case,  why it was handled as a federal receivership  rather than as an involuntary bankruptcy case.  Whether there remains any real discussion in the NCBA Bankruptcy Section community is perhaps the real impediment to such conversion.   To read a copy of the transcript, please see: Blog comments Attachment Document njr_1st_complaint_attachment_compressed_2.pdf (828.19 KB) Document nationwide_judgment_recovery_v._tyndall.pdf (176.3 KB) Category North Carolina Bankruptcy Cases Eastern District

Whether planning for the near or distant future, you want to be ready. Long-term disability insurance can help you be ready if you are ever physically or mentally impaired and unable to take care of yourself alone. Long-term disability insurance is sometimes offered through employers. However, people may also buy it on their own. This insurance may help cover some of the income you miss out on while you cannot work for a long period of time. You might be injured, sick, or otherwise incapacitated. Since this is an insurance policy, you are covered as long as your situation meets the criteria established in your policy. You might be wondering if this kind of insurance is even necessary. While most do not plan on becoming disabled, it is still possible. This insurance might help you cover daily living costs, medical expenses, and more. It is up to you whether long-term disability insurance is worth it, and our legal team can help you understand your policy. Contact Young, Marr, Mallis & Associates and ask our disability attorneys for a free case evaluation to get started by calling (215) 515-2954. What is Long-Term Disability Insurance? Long-term disability insurance is insurance you buy yourself or is provided through an employer that covers you in the event you cannot work for an extended period due to an injury or disability. This type of insurance might seem somewhat similar to other forms of assistance for people with injuries, like Workers’ Compensation or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). The main difference is that long-term disability insurance is not something you have to apply for. It is your insurance that should cover you if you become disabled. Long-term disability insurance may cover you regardless of how you become incapacitated or disabled. Perhaps you were injured at work, injured while on vacation, or developed a cognitive or memory disorder or condition. Under a long-term disability insurance policy, you may be covered under these circumstances and others. Our Pennsylvania disability attorneys can help you make sure your policy pays you all the compensation you are entitled to. Long-term disability insurance acts in much the same as other disability insurance policies or programs. Claimants may receive benefits and coverage that make up for a portion of the income they lose while they cannot work. As the name implies, this coverage is designed for those with long-term disabilities or conditions that make working difficult or impossible. Knowing Whether You Need Long-Term Disability Insurance Like most insurance policies, many people deeply consider the pros and cons of a long-term disability insurance policy before signing up for one. Perhaps one of the most common concerns people have is how much an insurance policy like this might cost. While prices may vary, the benefits are often worthwhile. First, ask yourself if you have been injured or work in a field prone to accidents and injuries. If you are at a higher risk of becoming injured and possibly disabled, you should consider getting long-term disability insurance if it is not already offered through your employer. This is often important for people who work as independent contractors in somewhat dangerous jobs. You should also consider possible illnesses. Are you sick or at risk of becoming sick? Does your illness prevent you from working? Is your illness a long-term or permanent condition? While some illnesses are sudden, others develop and become worse over time. For example, a person might develop cancer and, after years of treatment, find themselves unable to continue working. Are you getting older and finding it harder and harder to care for yourself? Many people use this kind of insurance because they have gotten older and can no longer care for themselves without help. Long-term disability insurance can help you pay for at-home nursing care or other services that help you survive and retain some independence. What Does Long-Term Disability Insurance Cover? Coverage from your long-term disability insurance depends on your policy’s specific terms and conditions. How much of your lost income is made up through insurance may vary based on the nature of your policy and what kind of coverage you selected. It is not unusual for insurance companies to offer varying levels of coverage for different prices. Generally, cheaper insurance policies tend to offer less coverage. If you are unsure what kind of compensation your long-term disability insurance offers, talk to your lawyer. This is a good idea for a couple of reasons. First, you should review your policy with an attorney to fully understand the terms and conditions. Knowing this information can help you maximize the payout from your insurance policy. Second, you should review your policy with an attorney to make sure you are not cheated when you file a claim if you ever become disabled. Insurance companies are not exactly known for being easy to deal with or even totally honest all the time. Many people have horror stories of being lied to and duped by insurance companies, so they do not have to cover anything. To make a long story short, get an attorney so you understand your policy and are prepared if you need to take legal action to get the coverage you are entitled to. Deciding Whether Long-Term Disability Insurance is Worth the Money Whether long-term disability insurance is worth it is entirely up to you. Many people have no other options when they cannot care for themselves like they used to. People might not have close family or friends who can help. If you have few family members or close friends who can help you if you are injured and unable to work for a long time, having insurance might be incredibly important. Going without long-term disability insurance might mean exhausting your savings while you recover. If you are not expected to recover, your savings might only last so long until you have no resources left. Contact Our Disability Attorneys for Assistance with Insurance Decisions and Claims Contact Young, Marr, Mallis & Associates and ask our Springfield, PA disability attorneys for a free case evaluation to get started by calling (215) 515-2954.

If you are applying for disability, you might wonder what you can do with the money you get from SSDI payments or other benefits. People often want to know how to use their benefits to save for the future and financially thrive. While the government does not totally control what people do with the money they receive from SSDI or other disability benefits, there are sometimes restrictions. Generally, people on disability may put their money into savings and investment accounts. However, there are some distinctions between SSDI and SSI. The type of benefits you receive might influence how you plan financially. While SSDI recipients face few restrictions, SSI recipients are more limited in what they can do with the money. Another issue is what to do while you wait for your benefits to kick in. There is often a waiting period of several months where people go without income. A disability lawyer can help you make plans to survive while waiting. Speak to our disability attorneys at Young, Marr, Mallis & Associates by calling (215) 515-2954 and get a free evaluation of your case. Can You Have a Savings Account While on Disability? It is possible to have a savings account while you receive disability benefits. Suppose your weekly disability benefits leave you with a little extra. In that case, you can put it into a savings account and build a financial safety net for yourself in case you encounter unexpected expenses in the future. However, the nature of your disability benefits might play a role in what kind of savings you can have. Generally, SSDI benefits are based solely on your work history and disability status. As such, you can save the money you receive through SSDI as you see fit. If you receive SSI benefits, however, the situation is different. SSI benefits are often based on your current financial resources. If you build up a large savings, your SSI benefits might be in jeopardy because you have sufficient financial resources to care for yourself. If you already have a savings account or want to start one with the money you get from your disability benefits, talk to a lawyer. Our disability lawyers can determine how much you can save based on the nature of your disability and what type of benefits you receive. Often, recipients of disability benefits are encouraged to save so they do not have to live from check to check. Financial Planning for Long-Term Disability Many disability recipients are allowed to save their money. The next logical question is, how do I save? Budgeting and saving are tricky situations in general, including for people who work and do not receive any form of disability benefits. Generally, once a person receives their disability payment, it is their money to do with as they wish. Ideally, recipients should be using the money to cover things like medical bills and pay for daily living costs. However, if you want to blow all the money on things you do not need, that is your choice. Many people invest some of the money they get from disability benefits. Again, how you may invest depends on what kind of benefits you receive and the type of investment account you want to open. You are also allowed to plan for fun things like vacations. The fact that you support yourself with SSDI benefits does not mean you are not allowed to enjoy your life. If your income from disability benefits is not enough to support yourself, talk to a lawyer. There might be ways you can increase the amount of money you get each week. Alternatively, there might be other forms of assistance that are better than your current benefits or may be combined with your current benefits. An experienced lawyer can help you. Can You Invest While on Disability or Long-Term Disability? Generally, yes. You are allowed to invest the money you get from disability benefits. However, not all investment accounts allow you to do so. SSDI benefits are not based on your current financial resources. Whether you are already wealthy or struggling financially, you may receive SSDI benefits based on your average weekly income. There is no set rule that prohibits people who receive SSDI benefits from investing that money and preparing for retirement. There might be restrictions on whether you can invest in certain investment accounts, like a Roth IRA. According to the IRS, money must be considered income to be invested in a Roth IRA account. The IRS does not consider money derived from disability to be income. As such, you might not be able to invest it in a Roth IRA or other types of investment accounts. Talk to your lawyer about financial planning to determine the best way to invest your money. What to Do for Income While Waiting for Disability? A major concern among people waiting for their first disability check is what to do for money in the meantime. There may be a 5-month waiting period before you get your first check. People waiting for disability might not have the financial resources to survive for that long without any income. Do you have current savings? If your savings can last until your disability benefits begin coming in, you might be fine. Once you begin receiving disability benefits, you can replenish your savings account over time. Do you have family or friends who can help? Many people rely on friends or family for assistance while waiting for their first disability check. This might involve a small loan from a family member or moving in with a friend until you are more financially stable. Are there other forms of public assistance you qualify for that you can use while waiting for disability benefits? Many people make ends meet by using food stamps to help pay for groceries. Your state might also offer various short-term benefits. Talk to Our Disability Attorneys for Support and Assistance Speak to our Pennsylvania disability attorneys at Young, Marr, Mallis & Associates by calling (215) 515-2954 and get a free evaluation of your case.

N.C. Bus. Ct." Live Oak v. Mafic- Claims Objections in State Receivership Ed Boltz Mon, 03/04/2024 - 18:17 Summary: Following the appointment of a Receiver under the North Carolina Commercial Receivership Act,  N.C.G.S. §   507.20 et seq.,  to conduct an orderly liquidation process of Mafic, the Receiver objected to several proofs of claims. The North Carolina Business Court turned to Bankruptcy Code  for guidance regarding the burden of proof necessary to determine the reasonableness or validity of a claim accepted or rejected by a Receiver. Commentary: It will be interesting to watch as the North Carolina state courts,  particularly  the business court,  develop a set of practices and a corpus of law interpreting and applying  the NCCRA  to see whether this leads  to more cases of business liquidation being handled in this manner than under the Bankruptcy Code.  Whether those developments might  lead to a relaxation of, as Chapter 11 attorneys often bemoan in their less guarded moments,  how they feel bankruptcy in North Carolina can often be overly punctilious and draconian is an open question.  Further,   a growing comfort with state court receiverships might lead creditors on the consumer side  to also turn there for an effective means of judgment collection. To read a copy of the transcript, please see: Blog comments Attachment Document live_oak_banking_v._mafic.pdf (141.29 KB) Category NC Courts NC Business Court