It’s happened again:  there’s an email in Monday morning’s inbox from a client whom I first met weeks ago, who tells me they want to file before Wednesday’s mediation in state court!  I have no creditor information, representation agreement, money, or credit counseling certificate.   Just as inconvenient, I’m not sure I have staff who can drop everything (related to clients who planned ahead and played by our rules) to make this happen.

Clearly I’m not communicating to clients what is involved in getting even a skeleton petition on file.  Lots of clients seem to think that I may be able to file the petition without any involvement on their part beyond providing info and money.  Wrong.

The bankruptcy paperwork is filed with both the client’s signature and my signature.  We are both attesting to the accuracy of the information and the debtor’s eligibility for  bankruptcy relief.

The full filing is even more information intense:  budgets looking forward and backward; recent financial history; intentions with respect to secured debts.  All of it is doable, just not with a snap of the fingers.

Got to go:  got a skeleton to assemble before Wednesday.

The details are set:  October 29  5-7:30 p.m.  Computer History Museum, Mt. View

Designed for lawyers new to the bankruptcy practice, this class will focus on the practicalities of the means test.  Who has to take the test?  What is income?  What are the overlooked deductions?

The class is limited to 35 participants and we will leave ample time for questions.  The materials will go through the B-22 line by line with case law and annotations.  There are not always answers, but there are approaches that competent lawyers should be advocating.

I expect to have MCLE credit for the class and snacks.  Whichever rings your chimes, join us.  Expected cost $250 with discounts for those who sign up another new lawyer.

Reserve a spot by emailing cathy@law-full.com.

Once again, a client told me that if she’d known before what she learned in the financial management class required to get her bankruptcy discharge, she probably wouldn’t have needed bankruptcy in the first place.

Pretty strong words, from someone who admitted that she approached the required class with low expectations.

She announced that she intended to get her child and her step children to watch the class as well, so they go out into the financial world well prepared to deal with money and credit.

The bankruptcy “reform” act of 2005 did little good for debtors or bankruptcy law or practice, but debtor education is a winner.

Falling home prices have lead to a surge of strategic defaulters, in real estate columnist Kenneth Harney’s words:  people who abruptly choose to stop making mortgage payments.  These folks have made an economic decision that continuing to pay on a house that is significantly underwater does not make economic sense.

Harney is clearly bothered by this choice by people who appear to be able to make the payments, but elect instead to default and lose the property.  In this and an earlier column, he raises the question of the morality of  elective mortgage default.

I’ve been chewing on that idea:  is there a moral issue when a borrower voluntarily defaults?  The law attaches  consequences to certain promises, such as the promise to repay money borrowed.  If the borrower is capable of repaying but does not, is that a moral failing?  Or is it nothing more than the weighing of the consequences of shunning a legal duty vs. the cost of performing the promise?

I tried thinking about this from the lender’s side of the transaction:  are there any moral obligations that the lender assumes when they make the loan?  Could the lender exercise a legal right (to foreclose, say) and yet violate a moral precept?  (All of this presupposes that corporations have morals, or moral duties, of course.)  Would a lender have a moral obligation to modify a loan in the absence of a legal obligation?

Or, is all that is involved in the mortgage loan transaction the undertaking to expose yourself to certain unpleasant consequences if you default?

It bears more thought.  I routinely ask bankruptcy clients whether it makes sense to continue to pay on mortgages where the loan balance is significantly greater than the property’s value.  I want them to consider the option of walking away in the course of the bankruptcy.

Dismissed and discharged. These two terms are at the opposite ends of the scale of results in bankruptcy, yet they are often confused.

A debtor gets a discharge and is relieved of the legal liability for the dischargeable debts in the bankruptcy case.

A dismissal means the bankruptcy case was terminated short of the discharge.  It could be dismissed at the request of the debtor or upon the motion of the trustee or the court.  But it means that the case has been close without a discharge.

A case in which a discharge is entered will be closed by the court when all the legally necessary steps have been met, such as the trustee’s report.

I am inching closer to presenting a 2 + hour class for attorneys new to bankruptcy on the bankruptcy means test.

My target date is mid October, mid way between my speaking engagement for the Midwest Bankruptcy Institute in Kansas City first of October, and my two presentations at the NACBA Fall Workshop in November.

You’d think I’d tire of hearing myself talk- or would you<g>.