What do you think?

[scorpion35]

anyone that owns and hides high value collections or any other items(non exempt) while filing bk should be reported
why should they be able to keep those items and at the same time discharge tons of debt?
its called scamming the system

[tyson24]

I have never been involved in the law by any means, but after reading all of the replies I wanted to give my 2 cents.

Ethically, I agree with Des and HHM. I would not risk your career just to fry this guy. If this guy lied, he will get it some other way in his life. He will pay for it, or not. But do not put yourself in the line of fire because of something he may or may not have done. It might bother me too if I were in your shoes, but we can't make everyone comply. I am also that type of person that I end up screwing myself and all I was trying to do is right a wrong by someone else. I mind my own business a lot these days.

Good luck whatever you choose.

[bcohen]

I had contemplated filing bankruptcy last year, but ended up not filing. The reason why I didn't file had nothing to do with impropriety or trying to protect asset(s), but rather was because the cost was simply too high. I did, however, attend initial consultations with three attorneys, and all three had me sign forms stating that I am retaining them for an initial consultation and that no attorney/client relationship will be created beyond this initial consultation unless I elect to hire their firm to file my case. I did not end up hiring any of them because the fees were too dang high. It was not worth it to me to pay $3000 in attorney's fees and court costs to discharge less than $30,000 in debts. However, as a prospective client, I would have reasonably expected that anything discussed during the consultation was confidential, regardless of whether I hired the firm to take my case or not.

[Peeps]

Hate to say it, but you're probably not the first attorney who has been in this situation. I personally think this falls into a gray area because you know you provided information to him that made him reconsider how he disclosed assets. You know he went out of his way to erase his disclosure of the assets to you. You know the assets were "gone" a few months later. Even though non-disclosure is important, so is the fact that you suspect that this guy possibly used the info you gave him to effectively skirt the law and commit fraud. And there are professional ethics issues there, too.

Somewhere, and I don't think it was here on this forum, I saw a trustee information page that said most of the people who were caught being dishonest in a BK were actually ratted out by grudge-carrying family members, ex-spouses, or coworkers who knew a little too much. An anonymous tip is an anonymous tip, isn't it?

Whatever you do, thank your lucky stars that this guy didn't end up as your client and is, instead, some other poor schmuck's problem.

As an aside, I think it's great that you do as much digging as possible with clients. I know it's something I've looked for with the attorneys in my area. I WANT them to find any and everything before a trustee gets the case. You're doing a service for your clients that some may not appreciate, like this guy and his disappearing assets. You're helping people get back on their feet in an honest and respectable manner. So even if you lose this battle, you're still winning the war (IMHO). Best of luck in whatever you choose to do.

[BKLaw11]

Thank you for the feedback folks. With the timing of his 341, he must have gone straight from our firm to another firm and filed his bankruptcy case right away because of the timing of his 341, so I would "highly suspect" (lawyer terminology for "I'm sure") this collection is still in his possession and he's just not disclosing it. While there are Model Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys, there are also state specific professional responsibility rules. Our state (no, I'm not in Ohio) requires that if you know a criminal activity is about to be committed, you should disclose. I guess this post was really just to get a feel what the general public thinks about ruining someone's life because he's hiding assets and essentially committing fraud, although it may be on a small scale.

To the person that thinks hiding things from your attorney is a good idea, that's NEVER a good idea. If I don't know the full scope of the situation, there's no way I can represent your interests completely.

[AbbeyA]

Thank you for the feedback folks. With the timing of his 341, he must have gone straight from our firm to another firm and filed his bankruptcy case right away because of the timing of his 341, so I would "highly suspect" (lawyer terminology for "I'm sure") this collection is still in his possession and he's just not disclosing it. While there are Model Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys, there are also state specific professional responsibility rules. Our state (no, I'm not in Ohio) requires that if you know a criminal activity is about to be committed, you should disclose. I guess this post was really just to get a feel what the general public thinks about ruining someone's life because he's hiding assets and essentially committing fraud, although it may be on a small scale.

Have you decided what you are going to do yet?

How often would you suspect that people try to do things like this? BK is such a big thing, I really can't imagine trying to hide assets and risk the repurcussions of being caught!

[debee]

How many lawyers does it take to rat out a debtor?

Fifty four. Eight to argue, one to get a continuance, one to object, one to demur, two to research precedents, one to dictate a letter, one to stipulate, five to turn in their time cards, one to depose, one to write interrogatories, two to settle, one to start a thread on bk forum, and twenty-eight to bill for professional services.

[AbbeyA]

How many lawyers does it take to rat out a debtor?

Fifty four. Eight to argue, one to get a continuance, one to object, one to demur, two to research precedents, one to dictate a letter, one to stipulate, five to turn in their time cards, one to depose, one to write interrogatories, two to settle, one to start a thread on bk forum, and twenty-eight to bill for professional services.

Ha!

[pavlikclan]

From what you say the collection made him on the verge of not being able to file chapter 7. You did not say it absolutely would put him over. It's possible the other attorney found another loophole to work with, it's possible he lied, it's possible he went home spoke to whoever he needed to speak to and opted to ditch it. Bottom line is you know nothing, you can only speculate as to what you believe may have happened. Maybe it turned out the collection wasn't worth as much as he initially thought, maybe it was all or certain pieces in it were fakes and it turned out to be worth nothing. It's hard to say. What I can tell you is this, speaking as someone who is on the other side of attorney client priviledge as a person who hires you for your services, or speaks to you about the possibility of hiring you, I would assume that the information I gave you was confidential. The moment you made said information public knowledge I'd scream long and loud about what a shitty lawyer I thought you were to anyone who would listen. While I am sure attorneys get their fair share of business from people just picking a name out of a phone book not EVERYONE operates that way. A happy customer goes away and tells maybe three people what a good job you've done. An unhappy one tells 10. Now I by no means think that what this guy did was right we disclosed a ton of assets in our first bk and the court took nothing. Hell they didn't even take the one thing they SAID they were going to take. While this guy wasn't technically your client, he at least believed at that point he would be which makes the whole thing a very nasty gray area and well two wrongs definitely do not make a right.

[df04527]

I hope you keep us updated on this dude. I think he should be ratted. I'm sorry it's people like him that make it DIFFICULT for ALL of us. This IS blatant fraud.

[tobee43]

How many lawyers does it take to rat out a debtor?

Fifty four. Eight to argue, one to get a continuance, one to object, one to demur, two to research precedents, one to dictate a letter, one to stipulate, five to turn in their time cards, one to depose, one to write interrogatories, two to settle, one to start a thread on bk forum, and twenty-eight to bill for professional services.

ok....NOW THAT was perfect!!! although i think the interrogatories are in already set up in the computer one just needs to change a few words here and there.

[chicagoannie]

I am not a legal eagle, but if there is no signed agreement of confidentiality between you and this person, and you believe he may have committed fraud, what is the harm in looking at his filing to see if he claimed the collection? If the items are not listed...then the question of his honesty is raised and you take it from there.

If, however, there is assumption of confidentiality when we folks speak with you attorneys in a consultation, then I think you cannot pursue this.

[enuffznuff]

I'm not a lawyer but I was married to one and was his office manager for many years.

I'm with Des...I'm kind of shocked you're even considering this. You do NOT KNOW that criminal activity is about to be committed. That caveat is for when you have a client in your office that says "tomorrow I'm gonna break into my ex wife's house and get my stuff back", you are ethically bound to report that to the police to protect the public. The fact you 'think' that he 'might' have 'done something' with an asset or 'might' have 'neglected to inform' his current attorney of an asset isn't even CLOSE to falling under that purview. You can look up his petition, but all that will tell you if if he claimed the asset. You have NO WAY to know what he did with it since you talked to him. You do not KNOW anything, you suspect, and I think you know that's not disclosable. It's not blatant anything, because you do not know what the disposition of the asset was, and you do not know what his current attorney advised him of.

If you, as an attorney, offer a free consultation to a prospective client, the information provided to you in that consultation is confidential regardless of whether they pay you, because you have set up the attorney client relationship absent the fee. To make this clear to all of you who think that if there's no fee paid, your info is free game, many of us have gone for consultations with attorneys that we did not then hire. Do you think they can call all your creditors and tell them "hey, so and so is planning on filing BK". NO. Why? Because you have confidentiality of the information in that consultation. The fact you didn't pay them is not the deciding factor, you saw them in their professional capacity with an attorney-client relationship where you were seeking legal counsel.

If you receive information that this client IS retaining the asset and IS failing to disclose it and IS defrauding the bankruptcy court, THEN you might have the ethical duty to disclose that, but you don't have any of that information.

[LadyInTheRed]

To the person that thinks hiding things from your attorney is a good idea, that's NEVER a good idea. If I don't know the full scope of the situation, there's no way I can represent your interests completely.

This is exactly why I think you should not get involved here unless your state ethics rules require you to or unless this guy's actions will cause significant harm to others. Because it is so important for clients, even potential clients, to be able to tell an attorney everything, attorneys need to be very careful about when to divulge information, even if your state ethics laws allow you to do so if the client is about to commit fraud. People need to have the confidence to tell you everything and know that you will keep it confidential. You need to have a very good reason to breach that trust. I don't think the fact that the guy is committing fraud is enough. I would look at the damage he is doing to others. A few creditors losing out on the proceeds of sale of some items doesn't seem worth disclosure. But, if the value of those assets is significant in comparison to the amount of debt to be discharged, the decision might be a little more difficult.