Follow up posting-Final Decision

[skyline1222]

I made a couple of postings earlier and have 1 more area to cover.

My story is that I filed for bankruptcy and my creditors meeting is May 14.2010

I spoke to my attorney and we have decided to not show up. He said the case would be postponed until a future date and then we would no show again and the case would be dismissed and I would be back to square one.

The reason for all this is that after I filed bankruptcy , unknown to me, I was an heir to my uncles estate. My father was the original heir but he passed away in late March and this made my sister and I the heirs. My portion so far is over twice the amount I owe to ALL my creditors combined. Now that I have the money I want to pay off my debts and be done with this.

My attorney isn't very clear on what I should be doing and he doesn't return phone calls very well so that's why I am posting here to see if someone can shed some light on this.

I have had 1 creditor contact me AFTER I filed my papers...they offered me a settlement amount much lower than their actual claim. My questions are

1. Can I just go ahead and contact my creditors and let them know I have some money and see if they will settle for an amount lower than what I owe like the first one did?

2. If I pay off all my debt to my creditors am I responsible to pay any attorneys fees on top of this? In other words these accounts were all in collection...now that the papers have been filed and a date set it looks like these have all been turned over to attorneys to represent my creditors in my bankruptcy. Because they have been turned over to attorneys am I now responsible to pay any fees these lawyers have charged my creditors?

Is it likely I will run into major problems handling things this way where I don't show and have the case dismissed and pay my creditors? I would think they would welcome this since they were looking at getting nothing and now I am willing to pay. I would take whatever I could get. Maybe I am wrong. What do you think?

ANY assistance or ideas along these lines would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you in advance for any help

Respectfully
skyline1222

[lrprn]

Some thoughts after reading your post....

I assume the reason your attorney doesn't want to ask your trustee to dismiss is because of the inheritance. Causing the bk dismissal by not showing up twice keeps that information from the court and also prevents the trustee from getting his % of the inheritance as well. Is this the line of thinking your attorney is following?

You've already filed bk. Even if your case is dismissed with prejudice because of two no-shows, you intend to pay off your creditors in full after the bk dismissal anyway, so even if your debt is permanently non-dischargeable that won't matter to you in the long run.

Just in case you aren't aware, allowing the bk to be dismissed won't remove the bk from your credit report or its impact on your credit score.

What an unusual bk tangle! Keep us posted about what you decide to do, ok?

[music12]

i don't think you would be liable for their attorney's fees. many agreements do have a clause that says that you'd have to pay for any fees they have to pay to collect the debt; however, their hiring attorneys after you filed bk is not supposed to be a collection activity because that would violate the automatic stay that's in place because of the bk.

i would wait a while after your bk is dismissed and then call them up to negotiate. remember, don't tell them you have a lot of money! tell them there was some problem with your bk and you would now like to settle. don't tell them what the problem was. and negotiate firmly so you can keep as much of the inheritance as possible.

sorry so many relatives are dying on you

[keepmine]

Whatever agreement you make, just be sure it's in writing before you send any money. Be sure it contains language to the affect that, they won't sell, transfer or, assign the unsettled portion to another collection agency.

[skyline1222]

Question is still not answered so that I understand it

This is a follow up to my previous post. By the way thank you one and all for responding...

I am going to take the advice of some of you that posted and just let my bk get tossed out in a few months and then negotiate to pay my creditors whatever prices we agree upon. HOWEVER one thing is not clear to me

I emailed my attorney and this is what I asked him

Since my creditors turned my accounts over to their attorneys to represent them in my bk case...Am I responsible to pay any of the costs that their attorneys charge them to represent them for acting on my creditors' behalf?

In other words say I owe Credit Card company A $5,000. My bk gets tossed out. Do I now owe my creditor $5000 or $5000 plus any fees or charges their attorneys charged them? My lawyer wrote back and said
"Yes you do...But since you will be settling with your creditors for a discount..it doesn't really apply". Not sure what he means.

My accounts were initially turned over to collection agencies and the attorneys didn't enter the picture until AFTER I filed my bk. Again..once this bk is tossed out will I have my creditors' attorneys chasing me down for additional monies? I don't want to settle with Credit Card company A only to find out that their attorneys are now after me. ALL my debt is on credit cards.

I was always under the impression that once the bk got tossed the account reverted back to my original creditors and when I settled with them for a specific amount that would be the last I heard from them or their attorneys on this matter. Right or wrong

ANY input would be appreciated

Thank you
skyline1222

[AngelinaCatHub]

In other words say I owe Credit Card company A $5,000. My bk gets tossed out. Do I now owe my creditor $5000 or $5000 plus any fees or charges their attorneys charged them? My lawyer wrote back and said
"Yes you do...But since you will be settling with your creditors for a discount..it doesn't really apply". Not sure what he means.



skyline1222

Seems like a duplicate post here. IF you negotiate a settlement, two poster above stated to get the full payoff in writing. Then the lawyer does not enter this issue. In bk it is unlikely they put a bunch of lawyers on you as CC's are unsecured unless they would plan an AP against you. I too would wait a bit after your letter of dismissal. Work with the smallest account first and negotiate it smaller. I have reason to take the smallest first as in theory, your future belongs to the Trustee after this point. Wait for the case to say dismissed and closed. Hope this helps. It is an honorable thing to attempt to pay them off, but get the best deal. As one said above, your credit still has the bk on board. 'Hub

[music12]

as far as i understand it, lawyers can get attorney's fees from you only if there is an underlying claim against you, and they do it only "on behalf of their clients", not on their own behalf. once you settle any debt with your credit card companies, the underlying claim will be gone. after that, the lawyers can't independently come after you. i think this is what your attorney is trying to say.

[skyline1222]

attorney finally contacted me

My attorney emailed me today and said...I am responsible for all collection costs. Once the case is dismissed and the attorneys turn it back over to the credit card companies I can negotiate. The final amount we agree on..the credit card companies and myself..is the only amount I will have to pay. When the credit card companies agree to accept x amount to settle my account that is the ONLY money I will owe. They eat the rest.

Does this make sense? It kinda does to me. Hope he is right

Thanks
skyline1222

[music12]

yup, it makes sense.