Secured debt AFTER discharge

[akcire]

**Sorry for the double post. Put in wrong file**

Hi, guys

Alright, we were FINALLY discharged on April 6, 2006.
HOWEVER, we just got a call from Best Buys law firm claiming they we still owe them $1400! We included that debt in the petition that has been filed.
We did not know at the time that it was a secured debt. We paid off one of our secured debts, so that we can keep our furniture.
However, since the debt had already been discharged, secured or not, are we still liable for paying this?
The way the dischage papers are read, it states that any debt that has been discharged cannot be attempted to be collected.
The lawyer says they will work with us and we only have to pay half of it in the next four months.
But I am not sure that we are legally obligated to do so since our petition has already been discharged with that debt included.

Any advice would be useful.

[gacreditguy]

let me guess, Bass & Assoc?

First of all, the debt is discharged.. You do not have to pay it and they cannot collect on it.

However, I have the same situation with BestBuy. It is secured unfortunately. Tell those bottom feeders that you are not going to pay it and tell them to come and get the stuff. 99% chance they will not come and get anything.. But then again, you never know.. If they do, you are still in a better situation than you were pre-bk..

Hope that helps out some.

[marializ]

Best Buy

Hey I got the same letter from Bass & Associates today saying that we need to return collateral!!!!!!!!!!!

[down @ out]

Secured Debt

Good Point.

I was discharged in February and received a letter from Bass & Associates at the end of February. The letter was not specific and I guess they want me to tell them what I bought and go from there.

Well I ignored the letter and haven`t heard from them in six weeks. If they contact me again I will request specific information about what it is they claim I have and let them burn up as much cash as possible to see if they lose interest.

Really I am not sure what item they are referring to and one would think they will have to determine what it is they are talking about. As far as I know I may have returned it anyway. Who knows.

If they persist they can just go to court and get an order for someone to come out and take a look see. From what I understand they cannot enter your home unless you give them permission.

Imagine the more cash they burn up in simply trying to get whatever it is the more likely they will move on.

What really burns me is if they wanted to do the right thing they could have simply come to the 341 hearing and we could have worked something out for what the real value of the item is instead of this nonsense.

The bums are simply trying to defeat the intent of a bankruptcy and go around the court. They simply believe they can bully folks into paying what they owed on the item plus costs instead of the actual value at the time of the bankruptcy.

I filed under the old laws so don`t have a clue as to how all of this works with the new law.

Good luck to all of us.

[annikasaunt]

Great, I purchased a refridgerator from Best Buys in November. Not by choice...it was the only place I had credit left and the fridge just died. I also included them in the petition. 341 is this Friday...hmmm?? I wonder what will happen now?

[marializ]

What really burns me is if they wanted to do the right thing they could have simply come to the 341 hearing and we could have worked something out for what the real value of the item is instead of this nonsense.



Yeah really I filed under the old law too. Never heard a thing till now wanting the stuff back and like you have no idea what I purchased since it was so long ago... They wait till after ive already been discharged.. give me a break!

[debtisbad]

This is concerning to me that creditors can come after you after your bk. As if there is not enough stress now.

[gacreditguy]

I would and will tell them if they were to call to come and get it!! I look at it this way, if it costs me a computer monitor and some other small stuff to getmy life back on track, then so be it! It is so worht it to me.

Also, what is the likelyhood they will actually come and get the stuff?

[gacreditguy]

In reply to your post, they CANNOT come after you!! They can only make an offer and you either accept or refuse it. However, the debt may be secured and if so they would have the right to come and get the items purchased on credit if that be the case. But as I posted above, will they really come out? I doubt it..

This is concerning to me that creditors can come after you after your bk. As if there is not enough stress now.

[SinkingFast]

We're in a similar spot with Sear's, possibly. Don't know what's gonna happen.

I bought a new wall unit oven, and counter cooktop range unit last summer for the house that's on the market for sale outa state. The old appliances still worked good, but they were well used and showed it. New appliances would give a fresh new look, right??!! Didn't even to top of the line on either one and spent $2K.

If Citi comes back and says, "Whoa! Wait there! We want our cooktop and oven back or you need to pay us $X." we're gonna say, "You can pick em up anytime." and giving them the address.

Afterall, at that point, they're gonna have to fight the mortgage Lender or a new homeowner to get the appliances back. Now I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that one.

[FoolAndHisMoney]

This is concerning to me that creditors can come after you after your bk. As if there is not enough stress now.

After you are discharged and closed, sure they can come after you. Since it's secured they still own it. They can't send the geek squad over in their VW to get the items back. They need to hire the local sheriff which is time and money and only the sheriff can escort them into the house to take back the used items and haul it away to sell it for nothing. It also cost money to pay someone to go with the sheriff to haul it away as well as filling up the gas tank in their truck and at $3 a gallon or more I think they will just forget about the item and focus on overcharging the next generation of consumers until the cycle is broken.

[akcire]

Thanks for the responses!
The only items that we still have from Best Buy is an old digital camera, maybe worth about $50 today, and a couple of movies. We don't mind giving these back at all. What happens if we don't have the rest of the items. We sold the stove & vacuum when we moved. Can they still make us pay for items that we don't have and pay a debt that has been discharged?

[cschon911]

Most likely best buy contacted your lawyer before the case was discharged.
We had a no asset Chapter 7. long before our bankruptcy was discharged
our attorney contacted us about Best Buy. It was a 2 yr old debt. We were
forced to reaffirm that debt. Unless you have money to pay your attorney
to fight it, forget it. We figured it was best just to reaffirm the debt because
we did not want to return our computer and dryer that were 2 yrs old and we had no money for our lawyer to fight it for us.

[makeitgoaway]

How do you know if the debt is secured? I owe Best Buy about $1500 for computer, TV's etc (we were theft victims) Thanks

[keepmine]

What happens if we don't have the rest of the items. We sold the stove & vacuum when we moved. Can they still make us pay for items that we don't have and pay a debt that has been discharged?
__________________

No they can't. Here's an example of a bank that learned the hard way about going after items that the conumer no longer had.

http://www.myfaircredit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=753&sid=e95569c1d5e93b075f7cc85c2531b657

Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 5:54 am Post subject: Bankruptcy: Great Decision: In re Evans

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In re Evans,
289 B.R. 813, Bankr.E.D.Va., Sep 09, 2002

On rule to show cause why bank and its counsel should not be held in contempt for violating discharge injunction, the Bankruptcy Court, Robert G. Mayer, J., held that: (1) where bank's replevin action was filed in face of clear evidence suggesting that debtor no longer had possession of leased property, replevin action would be treated as subterfuge to recover discharged prepetition debt, which exposed bank to sanctions for willfully violating discharge injunction; and (2) monetary awards that were entered against bank, for violating discharge injunction by trying to use replevin action as subterfuge to collect discharged prepetition debt, would be assessed jointly and severally against both bank and its counsel.
Judgment against bank and counsel.

As damages for bank's violation of discharge injunction, in using replevin action as subterfuge to attempt to recover discharged prepetition debt for sums owing under motor vehicle lease, debtor was entitled to compensatory damages in amount of $1,000, based on four days of wages he lost to attend hearings both in replevin action and in bankruptcy court, but was not entitled to award based on his alleged pain and suffering, due to lack of evidence to support such a claim or to permit court to quantify debtor's loss, or based on speculation that, but for adverse credit report traceable to replevin action, debtor allegedly would have obtained better paying job.

Although bank's violation of discharge injunction, in using replevin action as subterfuge to attempt to recover discharged prepetition debt, entitled debtor to reasonable attorney fees, fees would be reduced from the $41,117.51 sought to $24,954.00, due to excess time entries resulting from fact that debtor was represented by two attorneys in bankruptcy court, both of whom were present throughout trial.

Bank's violation of discharge injunction, in using replevin action as subterfuge to attempt to recover discharged prepetition debt, was sufficiently egregious to warrant award of punitive damages, in amount of $2,500, in order to vindicate orders of bankruptcy court and to act as deterrent to similar conduct in future, even though bank and its counsel were not shown to have engaged in similar misconduct in past.

Punitive damages are not restricted to cases involving multiple violations of discharge injunction.

Monetary awards that were entered against bank, for violating discharge injunction by trying to use replevin action as subterfuge to collect discharged prepetition debt, would be assessed jointly and severally against both bank and its counsel, where counsel was architect of this misconduct, having controlled replevin action and manner in which it was pled and prosecuted.

Back to top

David A. Szwak



Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2812
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 5:58 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here the conduct was egregious and in clear disregard of the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. What may appear on the surface to have been proper was, at bottom, an intentional effort to circumvent the discharge order entered by this court by falsely cloaking efforts to collect a pre-petition debt in the legitimacy of a suit in replevin. Unlike Cherry, the bank is an institutional creditor which has frequently confronted this scenario and is likely to face it again. While it has not been shown that the bank and counsel have engaged in similar conduct in any other case, punitive damages are not restricted to cases involving multiple violations of the discharge injunction. A mild warning to counsel and the bank is in order to deter future conduct intended to circumvent the bankruptcy discharge injunction. Punitive damages *828 in the amount of $2,500 should be sufficient in deliver this warning.