Right to cure

[UhhhOhhh]

I concur, something is not adding up. You said you had a lawyer, what was his/her take (hopefully you didn't use some cut rate lawyer).

First, it would be odd for the trustee to even demand an amount so small $200. I don't even really have a guess as to what it might be.

My Lawyer probably was cut rate, I dont know. He worked for a law firm, (I dont know if Im allowed to say the name on here or not) and while he filled everything out, I didnt feel he did a very good job. At the 341 meeting he showed up, but never advised me what the Trustee would ask, I didnt know I would need to account for my 2007 taxes so I was caught off guard.

Then the Trustee told me Id have to send in my stimulus package, and when I asked my lawyer about it after the meeting, he said 'dont worry he wont want any more'. Then when my case was discharged I asked him if the Trustee would want me to pay anything else or was I done, and he told me I was done and wouldnt have to pay anything else. (this was a year ago).

Its only recently I received the demand for the $200 (and my 2008 tax refund). The letter said that he (my trustee) received permission from my lawyer to write me directly. I finally found my attorney (his number had been disconnected and he no longer works for that law firm) and I asked him about that - his having told the trustee they could write me directly and his reply was 'yeah'. Then I asked him about the taxes and $200 and he said he didnt know what to suggest other than to send the $200 in and to write a letter telling the trustee that my taxes were exempt (as they were Earned Income Credit).

His demeanor was very 'Im doing you a favor, dont bother me again' kind of thing. Soooo this is why I was looking at pacer - trying to figure out whats going on, as my case should have been a no assets case (the bulk of my income is child support and even with that Im at about half the median income with no other real possessions - my car was taken back and everything else is below exempt allowances).... which is why the Dell secured interest is the only thing I can think that $200 would be.

[justbroke]

Yes, that sounds like a cut-throat attorney. They cut your throat, then leave you there bleeding. (I don't mean to sound mean and gory, but it's the truth.)

You may want to write the bar association. When a lawyer takes your case, it's his case until the earlier of it closing or him being official withdrawn.

That's just my $0.02. I'm sorry to hear you going through this apparently apathetic attorney.

[UhhhOhhh]

Yes, that sounds like a cut-throat attorney. They cut your throat, then leave you there bleeding. (I don't mean to sound mean and gory, but it's the truth.)

You may want to write the bar association. When a lawyer takes your case, it's his case until the earlier of it closing or him being official withdrawn.

That's just my $0.02. I'm sorry to hear you going through this apparently apathetic attorney.

[HHM]

You may want to write the bar association. When a lawyer takes your case, it's his case until the earlier of it closing or him being official withdrawn.

That is "sort-of" true, but not in the sense I think most people will read it.

Your lawyer will be the "attorney of record" on your case until it is closed or the attorney withdraws. HOWEVER, that does not make your lawyer your indentured servant. The lawyer is not required to do more than what they contracted to do (the court knows this too). Most cheap attorneys, their representation effectively ends at discharge (technically, at the conclusion of the 341 meeting, any work beyond attending the 341 meeting is typically excluded from the fee agreement).

[justbroke]

Your lawyer will be the "attorney of record" on your case until it is closed or the attorney withdraws. HOWEVER, that does not make your lawyer your indentured servant. The lawyer is not required to do more than what they contracted to do (the court knows this too). Most cheap attorneys, their representation effectively ends at discharge (technically, at the conclusion of the 341 meeting, any work beyond attending the 341 meeting is typically excluded from the fee agreement).

Agreed, and well explained. I would venture to guess that the smart lawyers (the one that I considered hiring at least) provide the client with a list of things that their fee covers. A smart attorney would also inform his client what gets billed above the fee and at what rate. (I'm sure this is all in the fee agreement, but I don't think all BK attorneys explain it well.)

What I don't understand is the number of BK attorneys that take cases, and know that they don't want to litigate and especially that they don't even want additional "work". They only want to file, attend the 341 Meeting, perhaps attend a hearing or two (for a Chapter 13), and be done.

[UhhhOhhh]

That is "sort-of" true, but not in the sense I think most people will read it.

Your lawyer will be the "attorney of record" on your case until it is closed or the attorney withdraws. HOWEVER, that does not make your lawyer your indentured servant. The lawyer is not required to do more than what they contracted to do (the court knows this too). Most cheap attorneys, their representation effectively ends at discharge (technically, at the conclusion of the 341 meeting, any work beyond attending the 341 meeting is typically excluded from the fee agreement).

Ahhh ok
I just re read my contract with ABC Law Firm. It says that my contract is with them, not with the attorney. It also says that ABC practices as a Group Practice so any number of different attorneys can all work on my one case. And it also says that "Client agrees that ABCs services will be considered terminated upon the following events: dismissal of the case or the closing of the case under Chapter 7". So, Im reading that to mean that they are still my attorneys until my case closes - at least the Law Firm is.

By the way, I thank both of you for your insight, as some of this is really confusing!

[cmb2001]

right to cure part two

I received my discharge back in june 2009, and now nov 2009 nebraska furniture mart is sending me a letter stating that they want to discuss their right to cure again. Can they still pursue action against me? what are my options?

[justbroke]

I received my discharge back in june 2009, and now nov 2009 nebraska furniture mart is sending me a letter stating that they want to discuss their right to cure again. Can they still pursue action against me? what are my options?

Since you r loan with them is "secured" by the furniture, they do in fact have a right to cure. While they can't sue you for the money... they can sue you to repossess their property (the furniture).

Your options are to either call their bluff and tell them to come get their furniture, or a settlement. If the furniture is old and not worth much, the former (call their bluff) may be worth it, otherwise the latter (settlement) may be appropriate. I say "may be" because you need to weigh the value of losing or keeping the furniture. This is a business decision and you should "feel" nothing about the potential of having to return it.