The Allmand Law Firm, PLLC Difference

Unlike most bankruptcy firms in the Dallas / Fort-Worth area, Allmand Law Firm, PLLC spends the time to understand the complete financial picture for every one of our clients. We provide resources, tools and advice to address the unique needs of North Texans.

Bankruptcy Grants Automatic Stay Relief Because Repayment Plan Not Feasible

Posted By admin || 10-Jun-2011

In a recent Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan, the bankruptcy trustee ruled that the creditor (movant) would be granted relief from the automatic stay because the debtors could not offer adequate protection.  On August 17, 2005, Michael E. Redden, Jr. executed a note, payable to Movant, in the original principal amount of $152,000 (the "Home Note"). The Home Note provided for monthly payments of $999.01 per month, with a balloon payment due on August 17, 2010. (Movant's Exhibit 1).1 The Home Note is secured by a deed of trust covering a home located at Lot 2, Block 1, of Cannon Acres, a subdivision in Harris County, Texas. (Movant's Exhibit 2).  On May 4, 2006, Michael E. Redden, Jr. executed a second note, payable to Movant, in the original principal amount of $32,000 (the "Lot Note"). The Lot Note provided for monthly payments of $392.66, with a balloon payment due on May 4, 2011. (Movant's Exhibit 3).2 The Lot Note is secured by a deed of trust covering an undeveloped lot located at Lot 1, Block 1, of Cannon Acres, contiguous to the home securing the August 17, 2005 note. (Movant's Exhibit 4).  What is adequate protection in bankruptcy? Basically adequate protection is when the debtor can protect the creditor's interest in the property which secures a debt, either because they have equity or because they are making some type of payment. In this particular case the bankruptcy debtors' property was inundated with various liens leaving no equity cushion and they were unable to have their repayment plan confirmed because the trustee did not think it was feasible.  In the end, the bankruptcy trustee ruled that the creditor could receive relief from the automatic stay because they would not otherwise receive payment and there was no point in allowing the debtors to retain the property which secured the outstanding debt.  (source: http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20BCO%2020110607796.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR)

In a recent Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan, the bankruptcy trustee ruled that the creditor (movant) would be granted relief from the automatic stay because the debtors could not offer adequate protection.

On August 17, 2005, Michael E. Redden, Jr. executed a note, payable to Movant, in the original principal amount of $152,000 (the "Home Note"). The Home Note provided for monthly payments of $999.01 per month, with a balloon payment due on August 17, 2010. (Movant's Exhibit 1).1 The Home Note is secured by a deed of trust covering a home located at Lot 2, Block 1, of Cannon Acres, a subdivision in Harris County, Texas. (Movant's Exhibit 2).

On May 4, 2006, Michael E. Redden, Jr. executed a second note, payable to Movant, in the original principal amount of $32,000 (the "Lot Note"). The Lot Note provided for monthly payments of $392.66, with a balloon payment due on May 4, 2011. (Movant's Exhibit 3).2 The Lot Note is secured by a deed of trust covering an undeveloped lot located at Lot 1, Block 1, of Cannon Acres, contiguous to the home securing the August 17, 2005 note. (Movant's Exhibit 4).

What is adequate protection in bankruptcy? Basically adequate protection is when the debtor can protect the creditor's interest in the property which secures a debt, either because they have equity or because they are making some type of payment. In this particular case the bankruptcy debtors' property was inundated with various liens leaving no equity cushion and they were unable to have their repayment plan confirmed because the trustee did not think it was feasible.  In the end, the bankruptcy trustee ruled that the creditor could receive relief from the automatic stay because they would not otherwise receive payment and there was no point in allowing the debtors to retain the property which secured the outstanding debt.

Categories: Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
Blog Home