Kentucky Bankruptcy Law

Counsel with Care

When is a bigger garnishment better?

This is absolutely counter-intuitive, I know, but it may actually be better to wait a little bit longer to file a Chapter 7 or a Chapter 13 bankruptcy if your wages are being garnished. This is because of the operation of two different statutes in the bankruptcy code. First, we have to look at 11 USC Sect 522(h) which allows the Debtor to avoid (get back) transferred property if the property could be exempted and if the trustee could have gotten it back. Second, we turn to 11 USC Sect. 547 which says, in a very circuitous way, that any transfer aggregating more than $600.00 to an unsecured creditor in the ninety (90) days prior to filing the bankruptcy can be recovered by the trustee (see 547(b) and 547(c)(8)).

So, if you had only $599.99 garnished from you wages in the ninety (90) days prior to filing your bankruptcy, then you cannot touch that money; you cannot avoid or get back the transfer. But, if you wait just one more pay-check so that the amount garnished is $600.00 or more, then you can go after the money. You need to make sure your attorney knows your pay-checks are being garnished and you must have enough “wild card” exemption (see 11 USC Sect. 522(d)(5)) to cover the amount, but this usually is no problem.

The first step for your attorney is to make sure the amount garnished during those ninety days exceeds $600.00. Then, he or she must list that money as an asset and exempt it. After filing the petition, they should send a demand letter to the creditor and the creditor’s attorney demanding the money be returned. The creditor will want to wait and see if the trustee abandons the property as exempt, and then they will likely offer somewhere around 75% return. The reason is that many districts require an Adversary Proceeding (a lawsuit within the bankruptcy) to be filed in order to recoup the funds. This means litigation costs to you, the Debtor. Then you decide if you want to take the offer or push the matter further.

Advertisements

June 5, 2013 Posted by | Bankruptcy, Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Debt collection, Exemptions, Garnish, garnishment | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Divorce, debt and the Devil’s heyday

I was sitting in state court just the other day and saw yet another example of the interplay between divorce and bankruptcy. A creditor had sued a woman for a delinquent debt. The woman came to court to defend against a motion for default judgment. Her defense was that she was not responsible for the debt because it had been assigned to her ex-husband in their divorce.

Unfortunately, that is not a valid legal defense. Many divorced persons erroneously assume that the divorce decree assigning debt to their ex also absolves them of liability on that debt. It does not. This woman is now facing wage and bank account garnishments because her ex-husband failed to pay the debt. He may have even filed bankruptcy which would explain why the creditor was only coming after the woman. Her only option is to go back to family court and get that judge to enforce the divorce order using contempt powers and make the ex re-pay her for what it cost her. If he only filed a Chapter 7, his obligation to her remains. If a Chapter 13, it would likely be treated as an unsecured debt that can be discharged since it is not the same as child support or alimony.

Regardless, if he is without resources, this may mean he spends some time in jail for contempt, but the woman’s finances are still wrecked and she may also have to file bankruptcy to get relief. Ah, divorce – the curse that keeps on cursing – the devil’s own little specialty area. Anyway, it is important for family law practitioners to know something about bankruptcy and bankruptcy lawyers to know something about family law so that their clients are not caught unaware.

April 19, 2013 Posted by | Bankruptcy, Debt collection, Divorce, Family Law, Garnish | , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Crazy you say? Bigger garnishment may be better

This is absolutely counter-intuitive, I know, but it may actually be better to wait a little bit longer to file a Chapter 7 or a Chapter 13 bankruptcy if your wages are being garnished. This is because of the operation of two different statutes in the bankruptcy code. First, we have to look at 11 USC Sect 522(h) which allows the Debtor to avoid (get back) transferred property if the property could be exempted and if the trustee could have gotten it back. Second, we turn to 11 USC Sect. 547 which says, in a very circuitous way, that any transfer aggregating more than $600.00 to an unsecured creditor in the ninety (90) days prior to filing the bankruptcy can be recovered by the trustee (see 547(b) and 547(c)(8)).

So, if you had only $599.99 garnished from you wages in the ninety (90) days prior to filing your bankruptcy, then you cannot touch that money; you cannot avoid or get back the transfer. But, if you wait just one more pay-check so that the amount garnished is $600.00 or more, then you can go after the money. You need to make sure your attorney knows your pay-checks are being garnished and you must have enough “wild card” exemption (see 11 USC Sect. 522(d)(5)) to cover the amount, but this usually is no problem.

The first step for your attorney is to make sure the amount garnished during those ninety days exceeds $600.00. Then, he or she must list that money as an asset and exempt it. After filing the petition, they should send a demand letter to the creditor and the creditor’s attorney demanding the money be returned. The creditor will want to wait and see if the trustee abandons the property as exempt, and then they will likely offer somewhere around 75% return. The reason is that many districts require an Adversary Proceeding (a lawsuit within the bankruptcy) to be filed in order to recoup the funds. This means litigation costs to you, the Debtor. Then you decide if you want to take the offer or push the matter further.

November 5, 2012 Posted by | Bankruptcy, Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Debt collection, Exemptions, Garnish, garnishment, Planning, Pre-filing planning, Property (exempt, The estate | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment