Negative Notice Language Question

[tigergem]

I filed an objection to a creditor's claim and I mailed everything, including the CMRR on 5/19.

But documents are file stamped by the court on 5/25. I can't believe the mail was THAT SLOW this time. Usually regular mail is only one or two days from here to there.

So. My question is, when is day number one of the 21 days in the negative notice language? 5/19 as indicated on my certificate of service? Or 5/25 the date of the file stamp? I am asking because that is nearly an entire week difference!

[MSbklawyer]

What's a CMRR?

You mailed the original motion, notice and certificate of service to the court for filing and also mailed a copy of all three documents to the creditor, right?

If so, the date the motion was filed is of no moment. The creditor's copy won't have a "filed" stamp anyway. It's when the motion and notice were mailed that starts the clock running.

Texans, I swear . . . . could make falling of a log complicated.

[tigergem]

What's a CMRR?

You mailed the original motion, notice and certificate of service to the court for filing and also mailed a copy of all three documents to the creditor, right?

If so, the date the motion was filed is of no moment. The creditor's copy won't have a "filed" stamp anyway. It's when the motion and notice were mailed that starts the clock running.

Texans, I swear . . . . could make falling of a log complicated.

Certified Mail Return Receipt copy to the creditor lol. Yes the whole tamale. Plus a copy to my trustee.

Thanks MS. I have to over think things, doncha know that by now?

lol you made me think of the 24 page brownie recipe that the Department of Defense uses for baking troop brownies.

[HHM]

It won't matter anyway, if the creditor wants to respond, they can file a Motion to Late File along with its response and so long as the reason stated is tacitly plausible, the judge will usually grant it.

I wouldn't worry about, rarely to do creditors respond to objections to POC's.

[tigergem]

Well. My objection is based on the following:

Nothing in their proof of claim identifies me, period. OR the loan, no amount... no nothing. They sent in a completely BLANK not filled in and unsigned copy of a retail sales agreement. I reckon that lacks form, substance and consent in ANY venue. Only the "assignment" clause on the contract was signed and dated by somebody, I reckon one of their people... (not me) in January 1999.

And it's dated more than 10 years ago. January 1999. So I also contended expiration of statute of limitations. Both in California and in Texas. My credit report from 2008 shows the date the account was closed as 2001, and after that the entry disappeared off my credit reports.

I sent proof that I lived in California both at the time of the date on the blank contract and at the time that shows on my credit reports the account was closed. Since I never ever received anything resembling a bill or anything - - nothing - - never even a phone call from them, the old credit report entry was the only reference I had, of course I marked the debt as disputed on my Schedule F.

I don't see how a response is going to help them much.

[HHM]

True enough, I am merely pointing out that the various "deadlines" and "time lines" can be made meaningless.

[tigergem]

Ooooh. Ok I understand.

[tigergem]

Even if they were inclined to respond to my objection, I would hope that they would notice that I am currently confirmed with less than 1% payback to unsecured and not bother anyway lol.

[justbroke]

Let me add this, from experience.

My District specifically changed the language in the Negative Noticing so that it's based on when it is docketed! The prior reading was something like "from the date of service of this paper". The new notice is "from the date this paper is entered on the docket". Huge difference!

So, check your Local Rule 2002-4 if you have one.

Also, I'm with HHM that they probably won't respond anyhow. I had a lot of those. Sometimes, it's just not worth responding to an Objection to a Proof of Claim, because it becomes a contested matter and adds more cost to the creditor, should they lose! (Of course, this was when I was a Chapter 13.)

[tigergem]

No... local rule 2002 only says "Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the Clerk notices the matters listed in Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002(a)." ...and the US Trustee does not want to receive hearing notices on Ch 12 & 13 cases.... And you have 14 days from the date of a returned notice to correct the mailing matrix.

Local negative notice language DOES state "from the date of service". I guess that is what threw me for a loop. I didn't know for sure if that meant the date of mailing or date of receipt.

[justbroke]

Well, the language was changed as part of the Interim Rules becoming the rules in December. This may be an issue. I'd call the case manager and ask if the negative noticing is based on docket entry or date of service. My District actually changed LBR2002.

[tigergem]

I don't think the language itself is an issue, because it is still written that way as part of my judge's personalized motion practice for dummies packet. I'll call them after June 9th and ask, if the answer doesn't become self evident.

[tigergem]

Today is day 21 and no response from the creditor yet. After today I will begin to breathe a bit easier on this matter, just a bit, because I fully understand that this deadline "doesn't mean much". So instead of the champagne, I guess I'll just break out a kazoo or something. Maybe I will reward myself by filing another claim objection to a different claim. hehehe. Anyway, I don't think my judge will look at it today. Or maybe even not til the first week of next month, from what I understand of the court schedule.

[justbroke]

Well, at least you got some practice.

[tigergem]

Well, at least you got some practice.

Yeah, they didn't throw my objection out yet either. Go figure. That was a big claim, too. Keeping fingers crossed!

I half expected an email from my Trustee telling me to sit down and shut up and stop pushing my luck lol.