Pacer shows Something different, today. Help!

[momof5]

Any idea what this means...

Under filers:

Request of Creditor Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2002(g)
Providing Address for service of Notices
To the Clerk:
1) This request is filed Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2002(g)
for the purpose of ensuring that the creditor listed below receives all
notices required to be mailed under Bankruptcy Rule 2002 at the address
below

2) The address to which all such notices should be sent and substituted for that creditor:

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK
c/o XXXXXXX
XXXXXX


This is signed by an attorney in a different state. A close one but different.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Okay all you Pacer experts. I know this means they want all notices sent to them but does it mean anything else. Are they positioning themselves to jump in or file an objection?
I have no assets for distribution as far as my petition and as far as I own.
The only thing that bothers me is that this Card was obtained last year(I believe it was July... $8000+ balance on it.( Its alot I know but we used it for everything!!!.. there was no limit until they shut me down) Last used November of 2007. Nothing was fraudulent as my husband lost his job and our income.

[lrprn]

No worries. It's just a formal request to the court to be notified if something changes in your filing that requires sending a notice out to your creditors. Nothing more than that....really!

[momof5]

Thanks for your response. I did an Oops and didnt search well enough before posting. I think my initial shock of going to pacer and seeing the one card that has worried me from day 1 listed there as requesting this 2002 thing.It really put a spin on things.

I have searched the past hour or so here and found others who Amex has done this with as well. I cant help but wonder why they bother if a person is a no asset chapter 7. What are they hoping to get?

[lrprn]

I cant help but wonder why they bother if a person is a no asset chapter 7. What are they hoping to get?

Requesting this from the court is an easy thing for AmEx. This way they are positioned perfectly if any Ch 7 case unexpectedly turns into an asset case, and they don't have to keep checking back to see what's going on with the Ch 7 cases they are involved in.

Put another way - if it wasn't to AmEx's or any other creditor's advantage, they wouldn't do it.

[dragonnfly]

I know some of the creditors also have companies that handle the Bks so when the have a Bk account they want the info to go somewhere else. Wal-mart is one that this is really common.

[sisterfunkhaus]

Dillard's cc holder filed that with me and I owe them nothing. So, who knows why they do it. Maybe so they can go in for the kill if something adverse occurs. But that wouldn't explain the Dillard's thing with me.