Litigation II

[kmkm]

I am a represented creditor only. Nothing more.

The scenario:
Debtor is known to panel trustee and bnc as previously enaging in multiple foreclosure scams and creating several complex abusive trust shemes for the purpose of asset concealment, possibly over 200 properties and respective trusts to date. They [Trustee & BNC] are well informed w/ this guy.
Debtor is a repeat filer, with his current '08 ch13 being the fourth bk since '97.
Creditors manage to have the '08 13 converted to 7.
Creditors get ineligible for discharge; he filed within so many years prior.
Debtor is incarcerated & handling pro se. This bk is the attempt to shake off a large compensatory judgement. That judgement was awarded on the grounds of fraud involving a real estate transaction.
BNC is currently awaiting debtors response on the ineligibility.

In the interim of the bk filing, another lawsuit has surfaced with debtor and one the trusts he created as defendant. The suit centers around a foreclosure scam. Meaning, the property was obtained under false statements and subsequently placed in it's own trust. The plaintiff now wants the property back and then some. Trustee and bnc have that info in detail.

So, everyone listed above now knows the drill beyond a reasonable doubt. Debtor says he broke, but amassed a fortune through promiscuous real estate transactions. The millions in asset value obtained were purposely placed in individual trusts to avoid detection and provide asset protection.

How will a case like this unfold?

[lrprn]

It's impossible for any of us to know how your bk fraud case against this filer may unfold. Hopefully the evidence presented by you and others will ensure he will get everything that's coming to him for defrauding so many.

[justbroke]

As already posted, who knows. You have to prove actual fraud or attempt to defraud. Is this filed within the District Court yet? Or, is this just an 11 USC 523 objection to discharge? I have utterly no experience on the U.S. District Court-side (USDC)... and I don't want to. If it's with the USDC, then that's a criminal matter and all the trappings of a criminal case would be in play.

In his defense, did he actually ever receive a discharge in any of the 3 filings since 1997??? I know nothing but it doesn't seem that cut and dry!

[kmkm]

lrprn,

I understand your statements fully. I do realize any court must act only within the parameters of the laws they are charged to uphold However, I do not understand the bk process in the event there exists obvious or strong undertones of dishonesty. Meaning; In light of the ineligibilty of discharge in this filing, is the court willing to let the 7 run it's course where an otherwise immediate dismissal would be the norm.
Also, the debtor could be classified as a career criminal, so would the bk court and US Trustee, in the face of excessive time and expense refrain from a thorough review of potential assets and hand the case off to a higher authority, say, DOJ.

Regardng you're personal sentiment:
Hopefully the evidence presented by you and others will ensure he will get everything that's coming to him for defrauding so many.

WE have provided a great deal of data to all the right people. Unfortunately, our government is too booked to take an interest in something so petty. Believe it.

[kmkm]

justbroke,

I do not know the answers to your questions. Sorry.

[justbroke]

Also, the debtor could be classified as a career criminal, so would the bk court and US Trustee, in the face of excessive time and expense refrain from a thorough review of potential assets and hand the case off to a higher authority, say, DOJ.

Unfortunately, Bankruptcy is a Constitutional Protection and has been in the Constitution since its inception (Article 1)!

That's why I indicated it's not that cut and dry, even though the person is a career criminal. With your response, I'm assuming it's still in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court (USBC). Unless and until the USBC finds fraud, then it won't go to the USDC.

[kmkm]

justbroke,
I know my questions on this forum are difficult and are geared more towards the knowledge of a practicing attorney. Even then, not easily answered without consulting current law.
So you're right, it's not that cut and dry. It is very difficult to lay before the reading audience this specific case without creating a confusing and lengthy essay. I am monitoring the man in question and at some point, when it's all over, may give an accurate recital of the bk end of the process.
I'm glad I took the time to create my posts here. The information may give pause to or deter a future would be bk con man.

Thank you for entertaining this dialogue.

[justbroke]

I'm glad I took the time to create my posts here. The information may give pause to or deter a future would be bk con man.

Yes it was helpful to me. I never even would dream that a career criminal, who is also still being detained by some governmental entity, is defrauding or, in the least, abusing the system.

In the end, the Trustee and Bankruptcy Judge need to tread lightly because there appears, to me, to be a constitutional protection issue (Article 1). I do hope that the Bankruptcy Court sees the light, there's enough evidence to find them guilty of Bankruptcy fraud, and that the subsequent federal case in the U.S. District Court, adds more years to this person's incarceration.

[kmkm]

I never even would dream that a career criminal, who is also still being detained by some governmental entity, is defrauding or, in the least, abusing the system.

Believe it and then some. Happens every single day.

Frontline has recently created a gripping piece featuring Bernard Madoff. The highlight of the documentary, for me, was the exposure of neglect of the SEC.

Initially, an eight page memo was sent to SEC claiming discrepancy regarding Madoff. No Action.
2 years later, a 21 page memo was sent to SEC. No action.
And near the end, 10 years later, indisputable investigative work of others were relinquished to SEC on a silver tray.

A gripping piece that exposes governmental negligence. The outrage is this was and is not an isolated incident.

[kmkm]

Update

Update:

Trustee has filed 7/10/09 motion to dismiss which reads in part:



So, there is no reason for debtor to carry on with this BK. Debtor desires dismissal by way of uncooperative w/ all trustee inquiry. I'm to understand this motion/dismissal goes to U.S. TT and will be reviewed because debtor voluntarily submitted himself to the Court in the first place.

Anyone have thoughts on this?

[AngelinaCatHub]

Update:

Trustee has filed 7/10/09 motion to dismiss which reads in part:



So, there is no reason for debtor to carry on with this BK. Debtor desires dismissal by way of uncooperative w/ all trustee inquiry. I'm to understand this motion/dismissal goes to U.S. TT and will be reviewed because debtor voluntarily submitted himself to the Court in the first place.

Anyone have thoughts on this?

That's not the way I read it. It looks like the Court is fairly pi$$ed at this guy. I would take this to a Criminal aspect and also at this time, he has no bk protection, go civil. Also in 11usc $523 he seems guilty of many and also specifically (a)(6). 'Hub

[AngelinaCatHub]

OH, I just note, he was incarcerated? Seems like he is getting his due by his own hand at this point. Karma you know.

Honesty is always the best policy. Getting money easy is an easy way of getting your life messed up. I believe he is on his way to bigger and better problems. 'Hub