Skip navigation.
Law Office of Jeffrey Solomon

Free Consultation
(954) 967-9800

3864 Sheridan St . Hollywood, FL 33021

Archive for July, 2010

Can I eliminate a second mortgage in chapter 7?

Saturday, July 31st, 2010

As a chapter 13 Ft. Lauderdale bankruptcy attorney, we have long been able to eliminate as a lien on homestead property a second mortgage or equity line if the property is worth less than the balance of the first mortgage.  This lien stripping has been common practice in chapter 13.   A tougher issue is can you eliminate the second mortgage lien in a chapter 7 and retain the homestead? The short answer is no.  Case law across the country generally has concluded that the lien cannot be eliminated.  Just this week in an anticipated ruling involving several cases in which chapter 7 attorneys tried to strip a second mortgage, a court in the Middle District of Florida also concluded that these liens cannot be stripped in a chapter 7.  In Re Hofffman, case no 6:09-bk-18839 KSJ, decided June 28, 2010.

I would like to distinguish eliminating the debt and the lien.  In a chapter 7, the obligation on the note on both the first mortgage and the second mortgage is discharged.  The debt is eliminated, so the homeowner can move at any time  without any liability.  However, both mortgages must be paid to avoid foreclosure.

Bankruptcy Planning-Tax Refunds, Plan Now

Sunday, July 25th, 2010

The  bankruptcy trustee wants your tax refund.  In many cases, the only asset of the debtor is the right to receive the next tax refund,  and you don’t want to be required to surrender it to the trustee.  Plan now.

What does this mean?  It is common practice to want to withhold enough taxes as forced savings so that the individual receives a large tax refund to pay property taxes, insurance, and other expenses.  But in bankruptcy, this savings effort can backfire.  For example, if a debtor files bankruptcy next January, 2011,  the trustee has a claim on the refund and may want to seize it if large enough. And this might go on for several years in a chapter 13,

What if I file a bankruptcy on October 1, 2010?  Can the trustee seize my refund even though I do not file the tax return until 2011? October 1 is 10/12  of the year 2010, so the trustee can keep your case open in 2011 to obtain 10/12 of the 2010  refund.  Plan now.

So as a Fort Lauderdale bankruptcy attorney,  I often advise the client to review the amount of tax withholding to avoid a large tax refund.  Lower withholding provides a better cash flow for current bills and prevents having a large enough refund that the trustee would want to seize. (Of course, I do not give tax advice and you should consult with the person who does your taxes if possible as to the appropriate amount of tax withholding so you do not end up owing IRS.)

Note that in Florida the portion of the tax refund that is from the earned income credit for low income workers is exempt from the trustee.  Don’t confuse this with the child tax credit, which is not exempt.

Bottom line, don’t create an asset for the trustee from your tax refund.

Chapter 13 Plan-How Many Years?

Sunday, July 18th, 2010

As a Fort Lauderdale bankruptcy attorney, we must address this issue in every chapter 13 case.   A chapter 13 plan is a minimum of  three and a maximum of five years.  Sometimes a client may need the full five years, such as to catch up on a mortgage.

The bankruptcy law changed in 2005 and provided that a debtor who earned below the median income of the state could file a chapter 13 plan for only three years.  A debor who earned above the median income of the state had to make payments during a five year plan.  However,  based on the statutory language, there  has been an argument that even above median debtors only had to make payments over three years if the means test showed nothing had to be paid to unsecured creditors.   Deductions from income could be made in the means test, such as high mortgage payments, medical expenses,  and health insurance.  After these deductions were made, the means test might show that nothing had to be paid to unsecured creditors.  In this circumstance, the argument was that if a debtor still needed to be in chapter 13, he or she only had to be in a chapter 13 for three years despite having a high income.

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals,  in  Whaley v Tennyson,  held that the above median income debtor in chapter 13 must submit a five year plan.  The reasoning is in part based on the Supreme Court case Hamilton v Lanning,  which was discussed in a prior post.  This court opinion is binding in Florida bankruptcy cases.

As a Ft. Lauderdale bankruptcy lawyer, we have been able to file 3 year plans for above median debtors.  After Tennyson , we will need to submit 5 year plans in these cases.