Debt purchased by a company after the debtor files bankruptcy? Argue the claim?

[olivies]

I have a claim filed (yes it's a 7, but we set a bar date just to see who's likely to come to the table should we convert to a 13). It's eCast. They purchased a credit card debt from Chase after I filed bankruptcy in 2009. Naturally what they filed for proof of claim was a statement stating they bought debt and that the proof of claim contains "voluminous" material not included here. Hmm... Have courts ruled on the validity of claims to debt purchased while a debtor is in bankruptcy and what they need to file for proof of claim? I'm curious.

[AngelinaCat]

The debt still exists even under your stay. This is done all the time. About some hearing I don't understand that unless they have filed an AP. They have a document stating that they now hold the rights to the debt. The voluminous info could be the paperwork you first signed on the original debt. They are holding off to see if you are dismissed again. Apparently they have filed a claim against your interchangeability on this debt. You will have to be patient and get beyond this if you can. I see in your sig, the UST is motioning to dismiss this hearing. How did he get into this? Without more info, I am only speculating. AC

[olivies]

The debt still exists even under your stay. This is done all the time. About some hearing I don't understand that unless they have filed an AP. They have a document stating that they now hold the rights to the debt. The voluminous info could be the paperwork you first signed on the original debt. They are holding off to see if you are dismissed again. Apparently they have filed a claim against your interchangeability on this debt. You will have to be patient and get beyond this if you can. I see in your sig, the UST is motioning to dismiss this hearing. How did he get into this? Without more info, I am only speculating. AC

No, there is no hearing right now. The UST filed a POA and motion to dismiss but hasn't had a hearing or acted on that yet. The largest issue is she's disputing my rent expense vs the standard given. The other issues on her motion are small, or inaccurate, or have been addressed. The only way we show enough DMI to fund a 13 is if the courts side that we get the rent standard and nothing more despite our family size and the fact that the real estate market does not bare a rent that low to accommodate 8 people. THAT being known, the attorney had a bar date set for claims just to see who would RSVP. eCast was one of the 5 who have responded so far. It's more the statement that there is "voluminous proof" that is filed without any actual proof of dollar amount owed filed. "Voluminous"?? Really? American Express filed our last two billing statements as proof. Sallie Mae filed a print out of our account screen on their computer system- the court doesn't need volumns. LOL. But shouldn't something be filed showing the account value prior to eCast purchasing it?