Bagels at a Bar mitzvah Part II

cookiemom

LoanSafe Member
GREAT find CM !!! You now have the citation of elements establishing "good cause" to reopen and argue a "lack of prejudice" on the lender (as they had these facts in their possession which does not impair a defense). Usually prejudice comes from delay or contradicting arguments. It unfairly affects the party if they can't defend due to the passage of time and dissipation of evidence. Wondering...Is it them that has prejudiced you?

I would say this qualifies for the trio claims of "laches, waiver and estoppel" doctrines. It's a good defense but unlikely an affirmative claim. They waived their rights by inaction over the passage of time (no attempt to collect) and are now estopped from claiming this right (foreclosure) after you were lulled into reliance on the inactivity as a waiver over the passage of time and proceeded to rely on the lender's inaction on the lien and subsequently made improvements under the belief that the lien was no longer enforceable.

You're doing good. You have a plan and supporting refs on the motion. Get that draft motion to reopen started. Create your template or ask the BK clerk if they have forms. You need to follow procedure of notice and hearing requirements. Sometimes clerks forms already contain the legalese required. Just ask. Some help. Some don't. The service of notice on the adversary claim initiates a new case with a new case number (your argument to get what you want). If you represent yourself you can request a waiver on filing fees (its a separate motion to ask) but not if you have money for attorney. Of course... Always advisable to have an attorney. Especially one experienced in BK and willing to wrap up the discharge issues on the second. Review the file thru pacer so you have an idea of where your evidence on the claim lies. In BK, attorneys have electronic access review for an initial consult. I would shop for the bk attorney unless your current attorney is already licensed in federal bankruptcy court. If he's not, well , decision made. Not qualified for the task. Ask him if he knows anyone with this type of experience. He may give you a good lead. He may also not know anyone in the field. Hopefully you can get a flat rate quote that is affordable. Last quote I got on an adversary proceeding was 2500 (against bank) but it was because it was complicated issue requiring time and review. I can see why this would cost any more than the costs of the initial filing representation and the one charge "no look" pricing. I could be wrong. It's your choice to go solo or hire someone, but please take advantage of free consultations regardless. Ask for leads because most BK attorneys provide limited services and don't litigate but they may know someone in a different practice that does.
I have some work to do. I am not sure it re-opening provides an automatic stay. So there is that too I have to address. I am also not sure if I have do this along with filing a suit against them so I can stay the sheriff sale. Question though, for my discharged BK 7, under the statement of Intentions. Does what is written in the section for 2nd hold any weight? I know a creditor cannot be forced to "reaffirm" but that is what I thought I was doing when applying and getting approved for the HAMP loan mod.

1731940565129.png
 

cookiemom

LoanSafe Member
Just here, working through the details....:D OMG please pray I can find an attorney that has experience in doing this!!!!!!

Section 350(b) of the US Bankruptcy Code allows a bankruptcy court to reopen a closed case under certain circumstances, which could include a debtor wanting to reaffirm a debt at the time of discharge, but only at the fair market value of the secured property at the time of the bankruptcy petition filing; essentially allowing them to "re-enter" the case to formally reaffirm a debt on specific terms, usually to keep valuable collateral like a car or house. This can also potentially stop a foreclosure. By reopening a case will triggers an "automatic stay" that temporarily halts foreclosure proceedings, if the court deems it appropriate to do so based on the circumstances;

Key points about Section 350(b) and reaffirmation:

Reopening a closed case:
This section enables a court to reopen a closed bankruptcy case to address issues that may have been missed or to allow further actions, like reaffirming a debt, if necessary.

Fair market value at petition filing:
When reaffirming a secured debt under Section 350(b), the value of the collateral is typically considered at the time the bankruptcy petition was filed, not the current market value.

Court discretion:

The court has discretion to decide whether to reopen a case under Section 350(b) and will consider factors like the reason for reopening and whether any parties would be prejudiced.

Good faith requirement:
To successfully reaffirm a debt under Section 350(b), the debtor must act in good faith and demonstrate a clear understanding of the terms of the reaffirmation agreement.

when reaffirming a secured debt under Section 350(b), the value of the collateral is generally considered at the time the bankruptcy petition was filed, not the current market value; this means the valuation is based on the "petition date" value, not the "present" value.

Explanation:
Purpose of valuation:
The primary reason for using the petition date value is to ensure fairness and consistency in the bankruptcy process, as it provides a fixed point in time for determining the secured creditor's claim against the collateral.

Impact on reaffirmation:
If the value of the collateral has increased significantly since the petition date, the debtor may be able to negotiate a better deal with the creditor when reaffirming the debt, as the creditor's claim is based on the lower petition date value.

Key points to remember:

Legal requirement:
Section 350(b) of the Bankruptcy Code outlines the process for reaffirming a secured debt, and courts typically interpret this section as requiring the use of the petition date value for collateral valuation.

Exceptions may exist:
In rare circumstances, a court may consider a different valuation date if there are significant changes in the collateral's value due to unusual market conditions or other factors.
 

cookiemom

LoanSafe Member
What do you think about this?

SA governs how the loan would be handled moving forward by servicers
- Hendricks v. U.S. Bank - PSA rules foreclosure term
Case reference 10849-CH

 
Top