7th Circuit Rules Bankruptcy Code and FDPCA Are Not Incompatible
Randolph vs. IMBS Inc. et al. 368 F.3d 726 (7th Cir. 2004)
by Alane A. Becket, Becket & Lee LLP, Malvern, Pa.
The Bankruptcy Code does not exist in a vacuum. Inevitably, there will be overlap between the Code and other federal and state statutes. Federal preemption resolves many of the conflicts that arise with state laws. However, where the Bankruptcy Code and another federal statute both address the same conduct, no clear guidelines exist to determine which prevails. Courts must look to principles of statutory construction and interpretation, as well as the underlying statutory policies and congressional intentions when there is a potential conflict among federal statutes, because, fundamentally, each federal statute has equal effect under the law. Baldwin vs. McCalla, Raymer, Padrick, Cobb Nichols amp; Clark LLC, 1999 WL 284788 at *7 (N.D. Ill.) citing United States v. Palumbo Bros. Inc., 145 F.3d 850, 862 (7th Cir. 1998).
Turnover of Repossessed Property and Adequate Protection Rights: When Can I Get My Car Back?
by Howard Gershman; Flamm, Boroff & Bacine PC; Blue Bell, Pa.
It happens every Friday afternoon, usually around 2 p.m.
“My client filed chapter 13 today and you have to give the car back or you’re in contempt.” Then, the most persuasive argument of all: “They really need the car for the weekend.” Bankruptcy can be magic. File an electronic image of a piece of paper and time moves backwards; the world stops at your convenience, and you get back a repossessed vehicle. But the Bankruptcy Code also provides the creditor with the right to protect its interests. So, to what extent may a perfected lienholder condition return of properly repossessed property?
Comprehensive Planning and Training Among Keys to Managing Bankruptcy Cases
by Raymond P. Bell Jr., Creditors Interchange, Abington, Pa.
Creditors in the consumer credit industry face many challenges in managing bankrupt accounts. Five components to the successful management of bankruptcy cases are:
- instituting operational procedures to increase recoveries and minimize risk,
- a sound management plan,
- staff training,
- utilizing a sophisticated computer system and
- hiring outside counsel.
Committee Agenda for Annual Spring Meeting
The Consumer Committee has scheduled a panel at the 2005 Annual Spring Meeting to review the conflicting decisions that continue to emerge in connection with Bankruptcy Rule 3001 and Official Form 10 in relation to unsecured proofs of claim, particularly those filed on behalf of credit card issuers and debt purchasers. This issue has been the subject of several previous articles in the ABI Journal and continues to present concern and confusion in the overwhelming number of bankruptcy courts that have no published decisions determining these issues. The panel will also discuss the recently promulgated Director’s Procedural Form 210, Notice of Transfer of Claim Other Than for Security. (Form B210 and related instructions are available online.)
The panel will be moderated by Burton Craige Professor of Law, Elizabeth Gibson, University of North Carolina School of Law, and includes creditors’ counsel; Alane A. Becket, Becket and Lee, who has extensive national experience and has previously written on these issues (ABI Journal, December/January 2005), and debtors’ counsel, David Lin, who has been successfully involved in these issues at both the trial and appellate levels. The panel presentation will contemplate a comprehensive and valuable presentation of these continually encountered issues.