Bankruptcy Filings have Decreased 41% since 2011

/in /by

In 2011 there were 53503 filings in the Middle District of Florida, by 2015 there is projected to be only 31760.

2011  53503

2012 45898

2013 41100

2014 36305

1st Quarter of 2015 7940   67.5% were Chapter 7 and 31.5% were Chapter 13 with 20% of all filings being done pro se

Of the 1st Quarter of 2015 of  7940 Tampa Division accounted for  11356 of those filings done

A google search for Bankruptcy Attorney in Tampa Bay returns  192,000 hits.  We want you to chose wisely, and choose us.

Our Chapter 7 starts at $795.00

2013 Avvo Client Choice Award

A+ BBB rating again no paid advertisement with BBB to boost ratings Avvo 9.3 rating- no paid Avvo Advertising to boost account to 10.0- rating actually earned

 

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761             Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]

 

Bankruptcy Court Denies Creditor’s Request to Compel Debtor to Surrender Property

/in , , , , /by

In re Trussel

2015 WL 1058253 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. March 5, 2015) (Jennemann, J.)

Secured creditor was not entitled to injunctive relief compelling debtor to surrender the property and cease asserting affirmative defenses in the foreclosure action. Evidence presented did not support the argument that debtor failed to comply with his duties under section 521 regarding the statement of intentions. Debtor attempted to reaffirm the debt, but could not reach an agreement with the creditor. The creditor’s desire to “short-circuit” the debtor’s legitimate defenses was not grounds for the relief the creditor requested.

http://www.flmb.uscourts.gov/newsletter/volume5_issue1.pdf

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761             Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]

New Amended Administrative Order Requiring Photo Identification by Unrepresented Parties

/in /by

New Amended Administrative Order Requiring Photo Identification by Unrepresented Parties

Effective June 1, 2015, every unrepresented party, including debtor(s) wishing to file a voluntary bankruptcy petition and petitioning creditor(s) wishing to file an involuntary petition in any division of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida, must provide acceptable photo identification at the time of filing, and the required debtor(s) or petitioning creditor(s)signatures on the petition.
http://www.flmb.uscourts.gov/

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761             Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]

4th DCA FL Holds UCC Article 9 – Not Recording Statute

/in , , , /by

The Court ruled: Because section 702.01 does not apply as between HSBC and LaSalle Bank, HSBC’s earlier perfection of its security interest in a note arising from the Perez-FGMC transaction establishes its priority over LaSalle. We therefore reverse the final judgment and remand to the circuit court for the entry of a final judgment in favor of HSBC.  Priority  between two assignees of notes  of the same mortgage is determined by by  Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code and not the recording statute applicable to assignments of mortgage.

http://www.4dca.org/opinions/May%202015/05-06-15/4D13-3193.op.pdf

 

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy 19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761

Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]

 Clearwater Bankruptcy Attorney, Clearwater Bankruptcy Lawyer, Clearwater Bankruptcy, Clearwater Estate Planning Attorney,  Pinellas Estate Planning Attorney, Pinellas Probate Attorney #FileLocallyDontOverpay #ClearwaterBankruptcy #ClearwaterBankruptcyAttorney #ClearwaterEstatePlanning #ClearwaterProbate

ND Cal refuse to Apply Arbitration Agreement in TCPA Complaint to Credit Card Issuer

/in /by

Savage v.  CITIBANK NA,  Dist. Court,

ND California 2015

Northern District California refuses to apply arbitration agreement to TCPA where there were violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by credit card issuer First Card,  calling the debtor’s cellular phone in an attempt to collect on the credit card debt.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14883859290605892284&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_sdt=6,31&as_vis=1&oi=scholaralrt

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761             Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]

5th DCA Florida Improper Notice Not Defense to Foreclosure

/in , , , /by

ADIEL GOREL AND FLCA TROPICAL HOLDINGS, LLC, v THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON

Failure to provide at least 30 days to cure the default  in  notice of default and right to cure did not prejudice the borrower, was not a valid defense to the foreclosure.

The Court ruled: Bank’s default letter set a cure date twenty-nine days later, not thirty or more as required. We agree with Bank that the defective notice did not prejudice Mr. Gorel, as he made no attempt to cure the default. Absent some prejudice, the breach of a condition precedent does not constitute a defense to the enforcement of an otherwise valid contract. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co. v. Farmer, 104 So. 3d 1242, 1248-49 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (holding breach of condition precedent must be material, meaning one causing prejudice, to constitute defense to enforcement of contract).

http://www.5dca.org/Opinions/Opin2015/050415/5D13-3272.op.pdf

 

 

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy 19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761

Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]

 Clearwater Bankruptcy Attorney, Clearwater Bankruptcy Lawyer, Clearwater Bankruptcy, Clearwater Estate Planning Attorney,  Pinellas Estate Planning Attorney, Pinellas Probate Attorney #FileLocallyDontOverpay #ClearwaterBankruptcy #ClearwaterBankruptcyAttorney #ClearwaterEstatePlanning #ClearwaterProbate

Time Barred Debt in Chapter 13

/in , , , , /by

Debts that are past the statute of limitations are considered time-barred debts. The following case law  sho0ws that time-barred debts are not allowed in the Eleventh Circuit, which is Florida’s Circuit.

Crawford v. LVNV Funding LLC  785 F3d 1254 (11th Cir. July 10,2014) 

Proof of claim was filed on a time-barred debt in Chapter 13. this was a violation of  1692e- which prohibits  ” any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt” and Section 1692f which prohibits a debt collector from using ” unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.”

Creditors filing bankruptcy proofs of claims will now be subject to the FDCPA, at least in the Eleventh Circuit, but there is renewed hope for certain defenses, such as the litigation privilege.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15631228362360253615&q=Crawford+v.+LVNV+Funding+LLC++785+F3d+1254+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

Bazemore v Jefferson Capital Systems LLC  (SD Georgia, May 15,2015)

Jefferson motion to enforce arbitration was ruled groundless  with regards to the FDCPA claim.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10648902652621483690&q=Crawford+v.+LVNV+Funding+LLC++785+F3d+1254+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761             Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]

SD FL Confirms Communications Sent Only to Debtor’s Counsel Not Actionable Under FDCPA

/in , , , /by

In Maignan v. Seterus, Inc., No. 14-CV-22488 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 11, 2015), the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida found that an allegedly deceptive communication to a plaintiff’s attorney, as opposed to the plaintiff himself, is not actionable under either the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) or its state counterpart, the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA).  

The action was dismissed  with prejudice a borrower’s action under both the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692(e)(2) and (f)(1) (“FDCPA”) and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, Fla. Stat. § 559.72(9) (“FCCPA”), confirming that communications directly solely to a debtor’s attorney are not actionable.

The Eleventh Circuit’s “least sophisticated consumer” test, a communication might violate the FDCPA if the language used by the debt collector tends to mislead the least sophisticated recipients of a debt collector’s letters and telephone calls does not apply to attorneys for borrower.

Order and Opinion (11Feb15) – Dismissal w Prejudice

Carol A. Lawson, Esq., 28870 U.S. Hwy19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761             Phone: (727) 410-2705;   email: [email protected]