Date question

[Granny]

What effect would postponing the confirmation hearing have on the due date for creditors objections to the plan?

I fired my attorney last week, spoke to a new one 2 days later and retained him. I've been checking Pacer to see if he filed any notification of the change and he hasn't, so I called him today to check the status. He told me that he hasn't yet filed anything or spoken to the trustee as he said he would. My confirmation hearing is scheduled for next week and the new attorney informed me that it would probably be postponed due to all the papers we are filing (to lower monthly payment by 250.00).

Since one creditor has me worried, I'm curious how this affects their due date for objections to the plan, especially since the plan is changing?

Thanks for any input.

Granny

[SinkingFast]

The due date for Objections is set by the first date scheduled for your 341 Meeting. Once you get your 341 scheduled, the clock is ticking for Objections.

Doesn't matter if the 341 get's postponed or your Confirmation get's postponed. The last day for Objections falls right at 60 days from the first date your 341 was scheduled.

[daisey]

I have a question about the date for objections - do all objections have to be filed by this time? I know it is going to take some time to sell the house and there will be no way they will have a concrete deficiency balance by the date our paper work said what do they do in cases like that? Also, once the plan is confirmed can it change? I know it can if we make more money or something along those lines but can creditors request more money or anything after that?

[HHM]

Let's keep in mind, objections in 13's are different than objections in 7's. The not so good news, is that it appears each district is allowed to set their own guidelines for when objections to 13's are allowed.

Also, objections in 13's are rare because all a creditor can object to is confirmation of the chapter 13 plan. The only creditors that really have standing to do so are secured creditors or other priority creditors and only if the chapter 13 plan does not properly account for and pay the secured creditor's claim.

However, I do not think the deadline for Objections changes if the confirmation hearing is continued.

[aa06a47]

Also, objections in 13's are rare because all a creditor can object to is confirmation of the chapter 13 plan. The only creditors that really have standing to do so are secured creditors or other priority creditors and only if the chapter 13 plan does not properly account for and pay the secured creditor's claim.

However, I do not think the deadline for Objections changes if the confirmation hearing is continued.

Your thinking old law HHM....it changed under the new law. Creditors can object to dischargabiltiy of debt with pretty much the same guidelines as a Chapter 7. The super discharge is "gone".

Here is a link that might clarify this somewhat.

http://www.moranlaw.net/bankruptcy_reform.htm

[HHM]

Your thinking old law HHM....it changed under the new law. Creditors can object to dischargabiltiy of debt with pretty much the same guidelines as a Chapter 7. The super discharge is "gone".

Here is a link that might clarify this somewhat.
http://www.moranlaw.net/bankruptcy_reform.htm

As a technical point, you may be right, but as a practical point, unsecured creditors do not waste time objecting to discharge in chapter 13's. Also, if you actually read the chapter 13 statute, not much has actually changed. The traditional super-discharge may be gone, but unsecured creditors still don't have grounds to object to discharge. They can object to confirmation if they feel there claim is subject to priority (i.e. fraudulent, but unsecured creditors cannot object to discharge in a 13 like they do in a 7).

[aa06a47]

. They can object to confirmation if they feel there claim is subject to priority (i.e. fraudulent, but unsecured creditors cannot object to discharge in a 13 like they do in a 7).

Technically, a creditor cannot really object in a chapter 7 to a discharge unless there is some specific grounds for it such as fraud...ect....which is basically the same guidelines now used in Chapter 13. Before the law changed, they could only fight confirmation of the plan, but not on grounds of fraud, just on grounds they think you could pay more.

I do understand most creditors don't fight the 13, but I feel it is misleading to state that the creditors cannot fight it. The rules have changed and the old law "incentives" to file Chapter 13 are gone.