National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center

Protecting The Rights Of Consumer Debtors In Bankruptcy

Property of Estate

by on

SunTrust Consent Order Payment Not Part of Estate

After the chapter 7 debtors received their discharge they disclosed to the trustee that they had received funds as a result of a settlement agreement between the Federal Reserve and SunTrust Mortgages. They moved to reopen their bankruptcy and amend their schedules to reflect the payment. They also sought to exempt the payment as related to a “potential wrongful foreclosure claims against SunTrust Mortgage” under applicable state exemption laws. The trustee objected to the exemption and sought to administer the payment as part of the bankruptcy estate.

The issue turned on whether the payment was a “legal or equitable interest” of the debtors that existed as of the commencement of the case. The bankruptcy court found that it was not. In re Vanwart, No. 13-515 (Bankr. E.D. N.C. Aug. 27, 2013). [Read more…] about SunTrust Consent Order Payment Not Part of Estate

by on

Proceeds of Settlement for Stay Violation Part of Bankruptcy Estate

The district court for the southern district of Georgia held that settlement proceeds from post-confirmation violation of the automatic stay under section 362(k) are property of the chapter 13 estate under section 1306(a)(1). Crouser v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, No. 12-156 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 21, 2013). [Read more…] about Proceeds of Settlement for Stay Violation Part of Bankruptcy Estate

by on

NACBA Files Amicus in Conversion Case

The NACBA membership has filed an amicus brief in the case of Viegelahn v. Harris (In re Harris), No. 13-50374 (5th Cir. August 20, 2013) seeking affirmance of the lower courts’ opinions. There, the debtor filed a chapter 13 petition, but after a good faith attempt to fulfill his obligations under the plan, he converted to chapter 7. The trustee sought to distribute debtor’s wages collected pursuant to the plan but not yet distributed at the time of conversion. [Read more…] about NACBA Files Amicus in Conversion Case

by on

Trustee May Not Sell Estate Property Free and Clear of Liens

When the sale price exceeds the value of the property but is less than the aggregate of all liens secured by that property, section 363(f)(3) does not authorize sale of the property. In re Jaussi, No. 12-34062 (Bankr. D. Colo. March 18, 2013). In Jaussi, the chapter 7 trustee moved to sell debtor’s land valued at $39,000.00 to the senior mortgagee for $1,500.00 .  Between the mortgage holder and two judgment lienholders, the property was encumbered to the tune of $44,040.56 with $40,181.00 of that amount owed on the mortgage. The motion sought to make the sale free and clear of the two junior judgment liens.

The court found that the sale was not permitted by the Code. Specifically, the sale did not fall under either of the two relevant conditions set forth in section 363(f), under which a trustee may sell estate property free and clear of liens when: “(1) applicable nonbankruptcy law permits sale of such property free and clear of such interest,” or “(3) such interest is a lien and the price at which such property is to be sold is greater than the aggregate value of all liens on such property.”

[Read more…] about Trustee May Not Sell Estate Property Free and Clear of Liens

by on

Post-Confirmation Funds Returned to Debtor after Conversion to Chapter 7

What happens to funds paid into a confirmed chapter 13 plan that are still in the trustee’s possession when the bankruptcy is converted to chapter 7? That is the question recently answered by the district court for the Western District of Texas. The trustee had distributed the funds to creditors post-conversion and upon motion by the debtor, the bankruptcy ordered turnover to the debtor. Relying in large part on the Third Circuit case of In re Michael, 699 F.3d 305 (2012) in which NACBA participated as amicus, the district court affirmed. Veigelahn v. Harris (In re Harris), No. 12-540 (W.D. Tex. March 22, 2013).

Key to the decision was section 348(f) which provides that when a case is converted in good faith from chapter 13 to chapter 7 the property of the estate is determined as of the original petition date.  Because the funds at issue had been garnished from debtor’s wages post-confirmation, they were not part of the debtor’s estate upon the original filing of the chapter 13 petition and, therefore, under section 348 would not be part of the chapter 7 estate upon conversion.

The trustee distinguished Stamm v. Morton (In re Stamm), 222 F.3d 216 (5th Cir. 2000), in which funds collected prior to confirmation of the chapter 13 plan were returned to the debtor upon conversion. Here, the trustee argued, the funds were collected post-confirmation thereby giving the creditors a vested interest in them even though the case was later converted. The trustee relied on section 1326(a)(2) which provides that “[i]f a plan is confirmed, the trustee shall distribute any such payment in accordance with the plan as soon as is practicable. If a plan is not confirmed, the trustee shall return any such payments not previously paid and not yet due and owing to creditors  . . . to the debtor.” The trustee argued that because Congress specifically provided for the return of funds collected pursuant to a plan that was not confirmed it could be inferred that different treatment should be accorded funds collected after confirmation.

Acknowledging the superficial appeal of the trustee’s position, the court found that  the Code sections at issue created an ambiguity that necessitated looking beyond the text. The court found that the legislative history indicated Congress’s intention to encourage debtors to file chapter 13 wherever possible without the inhibiting fear of penalty in the event that the chapter 13 failed and the debtor had to resort to chapter 7.  H.R. Rep. No. 95-595 (1977), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5963, 5966, 1977 WL 9628. In enacting section 348(f) Congress specifically addressed and sought to minimize the potential loss of property that a debtor could face upon conversion from chapter 13 to chapter 7 that would not have been at risk had the debtor filed directly in chapter 7.

The court also rejected the trustee’s argument that there is an inherent unfairness in returning the funds to the debtor upon conversion reasoning that the creditors lost nothing while reaping the benefits of payments made in accordance with the plan up to the time of conversion. Quoting Michael, the court found that the duties of the trustee delineated in section 1326 did not vest any rights in the creditors:

When the debtor transfers funds to the Chapter 13 trustee . . . under a confirmed plan . . . the funds become part of the estate, and the debtor retains a vested interest in them. Though creditors have a right to those payments based on the confirmed plan, the debtor does not lose his vested interest until the trustee affirmatively transfers the funds to creditors. Also, § 1326(a)(2) and (c) only address the obligation of  the trustee to distribute payments in accordance with a confirmed plan; they do not vest creditors with any property rights.

Michael,699 F.3d at 313.

Furthermore, section 348(f)(2) protects creditors from unfair manipulation by debtors by including a provision that in the event of a bad faith conversion the estate would consist of property as of the conversion date rather than as of the petition date. As the court in Michael pointed out, the specific expansion of the chapter 7 estate in the event of bad faith, indicates that when the conversion is in good faith, the chapter 7 estate would be as of the petition date.

This is a case that illustrates the power of NACBA’s members to create good law around the country by getting involved in select cases on appeal.

Harris opinion

by on

Post-Petition Bonus Not Part of the Bankruptcy Estate

In an important win for debtors, the BAP for the Eighth Circuit found that, under section 541 a debtor’s post-petition bonuses were not property of her bankruptcy estate. Klein-Swanson v. Seaver (In re Klein-Swanson), No. 12-6054 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. March 22, 2013). [Read more…] about Post-Petition Bonus Not Part of the Bankruptcy Estate

by on

Whether Inheritance Received More than 180 Days Post-Petition Is Property of Estate

The Fourth Circuit has agreed to hear a direct appeal to address the issue of whether an inheritance received more than 180 days post-petition is property of the Chapter 13 estate.  Carroll v. Logan (In re Carroll), No. 13-1024. The debtors received a $100,000.00 inheritance after the 180-day period had lapsed and the trustee sought to modify the plan to include those funds. The bankruptcy court found that the inheritance was part of the estate and granted the trustee’s motion. In re Carroll, 2012 WL 5512356 (Bankr. E.D. N.C. Nov. 14, 2012). [Read more…] about Whether Inheritance Received More than 180 Days Post-Petition Is Property of Estate

by on

Trustee May Not Waive Debtor’s Defenses to Foreclosure Action

In an action comparable to two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida stepped in on behalf of the sheep and disapproved a settlement agreement under which the trustee sought to waive the debtor’s defenses in an underlying state court foreclosure action. In re Larkin, 468 B.R. 431 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2012). [Read more…] about Trustee May Not Waive Debtor’s Defenses to Foreclosure Action