Thread: BK Proof of Claims as a weapon?

In about 3 weeks, I'll get a listing from my C13 Trustee of the "proofs of claim" that have been filed in my C13 case. I'm expecting everyone to file, since the smallest debt is $5k and I'm paying back 20%.

I've been toying with the idea of objecting to many of their "proofs of claim" on the grounds that their external charge-offs and/or their accruing late payments on my CRs show that they believe that I have an obligation to them outside of BK, in which case they have no right to collect money inside of BK.

The point being not to prevent them from getting money in BK, but to get the judge ticked enough to order them to clean up the reports.

Think it's worth a shot, or would it just get the judge ticked at ME?

Also, has anyone heard of anyone going so far as to successfully object in court to incorrect CR listings as violations of the automatic stay?

Neither the judge nor, the trustee will have any interest in what your credit report looks like now or, in the future. They'll just see any sort of motion along those lines as a waste of the courts time.

You may be right, but why do you think so?

The FTC published an opinion letter in which they asserted that a chargeoff listing is a collection attempt. It is also true that, were I to try to finance or refinance a mortgage anytime in the next five years, I would be told to pay off the chargeoffs first (totalling $80k, btw). That looks like a violation of stay to me. And using the same arguments, late payment listings are also collection attempts. So why not?

I was told by my Trustee and my lawyer both that, now that everyone knows that I've filed, ANY collection attempt should be reported to the Trustee as a violation of stay. Why shouldn't that work? Have people tried it and failed, or has it just never been tried?

Just because something hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be done.

I think the debtor is entitled to use the bankruptcy court to protect himself from "continued collection activity" during the pendancy of the case. If there is case law supporting the idea that continuing to report an account to the CRA's is continued collection activity, then why would putting a stop to this be a waste of the court's time?

The FTC has written an opinion letter about what constitutes "continuing collection activity". As far as case law, the Indiana Appeals Court case I posted a link to a few days ago might be of some help. I recall reading in one court's opinion (it may have been the Indiana case), that it is well known that creditors use the threat of reporting to credit bureaus as a tool to get debtors to pay.

A good bankruptcy attorney could probably get a creditor sanctioned for violating the automatic stay, so perhaps one would take your case on contingency.

Anyway, I really don't know squat about any of this, but if the basic premise of bankruptcy is that the debtor is entitled to a fresh start, then I say there is no better place to start than the bankruptcy court. What's the harm in trying it with one creditor and seeing how it goes?

Bk courts infer collection attempts as physcial attempts at collection. If creditors call you or, send letters, etc the bk court will get involved. What does your lawyer say about the idea?

Sorry to pop your bubble, but this is what you can expect. Those companies who care about getting their percentage will file a proof of claim. Of my entire list, only 4 filed proofs!

Unless you have a creditor that doesn't know how BK works, you won't have any show at the 341 meeting (meeting of the creditors). At that time, your plan will be pretty much adopted as-is.

When all is said and done and you have the DISCHARGE in hand, all the creditors will ultimately wipe out your balance and mark it as included in BK. Not filing a proof is not an admission that the debt didn't exist, just a notice that they simply don't care about getting their money. They are then time-barred from collecting anything.

Many companies will simply stop reporting it and when you dispute them, they will not respond, hence they get deleted. There are the jerks, though, that will let one sit for the full 7 years.

I tried using the fact that they didn't file a proof of claim because they had no proof. That only worked on a couple of accounts. The rest remained.

One more thing. Unless you fail to make your payments timely, you will never see the inside of a court room.

Any attempt to use this as a method to clean up your bureau will piss off your attorney and get you shushed up fast.

As far as they are concerned, it is irrelevant.