Bankruptcy and the Mortgage Crisis – One Small Tale
I
wrote the following epistle to a Chapter 13 Trustee regarding a loan
modification and I thought I would share it on my blog.
I
am a bankruptcy attorney. This summer marked twenty years of filing
bankruptcies in the Southern District of Illinois. I have filed around 7,000
cases in my practice. At one point in the late 1990s, I accounted for 1% of all
bankruptcies filed in the state of Illinois. Not the firm I worked for, me. I’m
pretty proud of that.
I
could write pages upon pages about bankruptcy but for now I will only give some
background information as to the following letter:
A
Chapter 13 bankruptcy is a consolidation of all debt under one payment. There
are some exceptions – you can pay rent-to-own furniture directly, child support
directly and your house payment directly if you are current. Otherwise all
debts are included in the payment.
You
pay a trustee and the trustee pays all your creditors. After five years (or
less) of payments, most of your debt is discharged.
If
you are behind on your house, the house payment and the arrears owed are also
in the Chapter 13 plan. At the end of the payment term, the arrears owed are
paid off and the mortgage is “contractually current”. You resume paying on your
house directly and you are no longer behind.
The
bulk of Chapter 13s are filed because people are behind on their house and want
to stop a future or current foreclosure. The trouble is, finding out the
arrears owed is a guessing game. The mortgage company is entitled to their
attorney’s fees, inspection costs, filing fees; you name it. It gets pretty
expensive and some of the costs are ridiculous. As a Debtor’s attorney, I have
the right to object to these claims, but the odds of winning are very small. I
explain it by using the term “blank check” in my email to the Trustee below.
The
email came about because a Debtor of mine did a loan modification with the
mortgage company. We filed the loan modification with the court for approval
and the Trustee asked my opinion of it. My “take” on it.
He
does not approve of the modification – it adds $20,000.00 to the principal, but
makes them contractually current – there will be no more arrears owed. If he
does not approve the modification, the Debtor will be forced to pay on the old
mortgage or surrender the house in the Chapter 13.
That’s
why he asked what “my take on it” was. Here was my reply. Italics
indicate additions to this blog to help explain legalese…
***
For
the past 70 years Americans have been bullshitted into thinking they HAVE to
have a house. THIS house.
In
twenty years of filing bankruptcies I have come to the realization that
convincing an average Debtor to give up their house is hopeless. I would have
better odds convincing them to lop off a toe.
Bank
of America (or whoever has bought them out this week) has added $20,000.00 to
their mortgage per the modification. In the past ten years mortgage companies have
seen bankruptcy as a blank check. They can file any amount of fees and costs
without fear of a sustained objection. Secretarial costs otherwise disallowed
by Wiedau (this is an old case in
my district that sets out what is and is not appropriate charges when applying
for attorney’s fees – signing a letter is not, paralegal and secretarial work
is not, meetings and phone calls with clients are acceptable, etc.),
inspection fees for inspections never performed (I once objected to inspection fees and asked for copies of the
inspection reports. There were none, so I argued no such inspections happened),
and attorney’s fees for documents signed with a stamp; all have been allowed.
The odds of winning such arguments are the same as a Toddler T-ball team winning
the World Series. And who is going to
give the Debtors the thousands of dollars needed to appeal? Those judges will
likely roll over in favor of the mortgage companies, too.
So
until judges decide to stand against the mortgage companies outrageous fees,
they can charge as much as they want.
Why isn’t the Bank asked to account for the additional $20,000.00? Why
must the Debtor defend their acceptance when the Bank does not have to defend
its offer? The answer to the question (if there is one) only proves the point.
The actions of mortgage companies are sacrosanct.
The
extra amount is just about what their arrearage claim is, by the way.
Is
this in their best interest? No.
Will
we be able to convince the client this is not in their best interest? No.
If
this is not approved by the Court will they likely voluntarily dismiss their
bankruptcy case? If Bank of America will honor the agreement outside the
bankruptcy, yes.
We-the-People
will do anything, ANYTHING, to keep these albatrosses around our necks. They
will be willing to pay an extra $20,000.00 later to keep their payment down
now. That’s how Wall Street wants it. If this extra $20,000.00 was filed as an
amended claim for costs and fees, no one but the Debtor’s attorney would blink.
And unfortunately that is all a Debtor’s attorney can do about it - blink.
Objection is futile.
Debtors
file a Chapter 13 to keep their house. They would likely then dismiss a Chapter
13 to keep their house. If the Bank told them they had to stand naked on an
Interstate and sing “Rue Britannia” to keep their house, they likely would.
Dance, injun, dance!
We
might as well let them keep their
split-level-two-car-garage-picket-fence-2.5-kids-and-a-dog-gotta-run-the-PTA-meeting-starts-in-an-hour
house. Keeping THIS house has been indoctrinated into our DNA.
Otherwise
what is their option? If they dismiss, no one gets anything, other than the
Debtors get to keep their house. We may as well help them get rid of the rest
of the dischargeable debt and when they die of old age, let their kids worry
about a house that still has a $50,000.00 mortgage on it. If they are lucky.
It’s
the American Dream.
But
that’s my take on it. J And now you know, the REST
of the story… Good day.
Copyright 2013 Michael G Curry
No comments:
Post a Comment