I'm a $600k creditor

[kmkm]

I am a creditor in an ongoing BK case. The debtor filed a 13 and my attorneys filed to have it converted to 7, which took place. The debtor is ineligible for discharge due to his repetitive BK abuse in '97, '00, '04 and now '08. The debtor did file a motion for an extension of time to respond to the ineligibility of discharge.

The background info on the man in question is that he ran a very profitable foreclosure scam. He would approach people under financial duress and pose as legitimate businessman willing to help. He would trick the victim into signing over the deed to their house and either rent it or resell it later, sometimes without paying off any mortgages. Yes, leaving the already penniless victim with a mortgage to pay on a house they no longer own. He accumalated millions of dollars and hundreds of properties this way and this foreclosure scam soon turned into what the IRS terms as an abusive trust scheme. The properties that were ill gotten were titled to a trust all their own. Meaning each property was transferred into a dedicated trust. The reason for doing this was to evade taxation, make asset location virtually impossible and lawsuit proof himself via no ownership, just controlling the asset.

As noted above, he has used BK to his advantage before, but this time is proving more strenuous because my atty has sent to the Trustee thorough data on how this debtor manages asset conversion and concealment.


So I'd like to ask a question relating to the BK process.

In the face of such complexity regarding the trust scheme and in light of the financial predatorial nature of the debtor, would the average Trustee be inclined to pursue this BK with a vengance or opt to quickly get the case sewn up without incident?

[HHM]

It sounds like the system will catch up with him this time. It is not so much the BK trustee that cares, your attorney (as I am sure they are aware) needs to get the US Trustee Involved. They are the ones with jurisdication for BK abuse.

[kmkm]

HHM,
I've seen your posts here and you are generous.

When you say get the Trustee involved; Does a Trustee have at his or her own discretion a communication and/or dialogue with creditors of their choice?
Secondly, I'm to understand that the Trustee gets a percentage of the liquidation. So do they encourage creditor input?

[hamburgervol]

He needs to be in a cell with Madoff, IMHO.

[car67]

Sounds like a stressful life!

[HHM]

HHM,
I've seen your posts here and you are generous.

When you say get the Trustee involved; Does a Trustee have at his or her own discretion a communication and/or dialogue with creditors of their choice?
Secondly, I'm to understand that the Trustee gets a percentage of the liquidation. So do they encourage creditor input?

First, in any BK, there are TWO trustees. The Panel Trustee, or more commonly referred to as the Bankruptcy Trustee. This is the person who gets a cut of whatever assets he can get his hands on to distribute to creditors. His SOLE job is to get assets. The Bankruptcy Trustee represents a debtor's creditors-collectively-the bankruptcy trustee does not advocate for any particular creditor. So, in your particular case, the Bankruptcy Trustee would probably not be directly helpful. The other trustee is the United States Trustee. These are the people that work for the Department of Justice and oversee the integrity of the BK system. If someone is abusing the BK process, it is the U.S. Trustee who needs to get involved.

[kmkm]

HHM
Thank you very much for that clarification. Well put together.

I take your remarks on the bk abuse seriously. This man has gotten away with so much, so long,,,,,,, primarily through state/fed lack of interest in prosecution. Believe it.

On the matter of willfully omitting disclosure of assets. If a trustee locates something of value that was not included initially, what is the preferred course of action? Do they dismiss the case on the grounds of fraud or carry on full steam with a sell off?

I guess what I'm asking is how agressive do they get. Are they Gestapo-ish or something much less.

[HHM]

HHM
Thank you very much for that clarification. Well put together.

I take your remarks on the bk abuse seriously. This man has gotten away with so much, so long,,,,,,, primarily through state/fed lack of interest in prosecution. Believe it.

On the matter of willfully omitting disclosure of assets. If a trustee locates something of value that was not included initially, what is the preferred course of action? Do they dismiss the case on the grounds of fraud or carry on full steam with a sell off?

I guess what I'm asking is how agressive do they get. Are they Gestapo-ish or something much less.

Depends on the Trustee. But if you have asset information, then that should be disclosed to the Bankruptcy Trustee. The US Trustee would be the ones that might file a motion to dismiss for a misleading petition, the BK Trustee would pursue the assets. Also, the BK trustee or US Trustee could file a motion to deny discharge. This means that the debtor could NEVER discharge the debts that were included in the BK, but that remedy is reserved for serious fraud (which you might have in this case).

[Bankruptcy20]

HHM, this is a bit of a tangent question.

On the 10% commission that the creditor trustee gets, can I clarify if:

1) Is it solely on assets that are discovered beyond what is shown on the filing? Or, on any gross assets that are used to pay creditors?
2) Is it for all creditors or only unsecured? That is, does the trustee get a cut if there is a value deemed on any priority claims (i.e., current taxes due, cars, or other secured assets)?

Thanks.

[HHM]

HHM, this is a bit of a tangent question.

On the 10% commission that the creditor trustee gets, can I clarify if:

1) Is it solely on assets that are discovered beyond what is shown on the filing? Or, on any gross assets that are used to pay creditors?
2) Is it for all creditors or only unsecured? That is, does the trustee get a cut if there is a value deemed on any priority claims (i.e., current taxes due, cars, or other secured assets)?

Thanks.

Not a problem.

1. It is 10% on the value of ALL non-exempt assets collected for the benefit of unsecured creditors. So, if the debtor discloses $500,000 in non-exempt assets in the petition, the trustee will get 10% of that property in addition to 10% of anything else the trustee can track down.

2. See answer to #1, The trustee works for the unsecured creditors (so-to-speak). The Bankruptcy system assumes secured creditors are protected and can exercise their rights to the collateral securing the debt (which they can).

[Bankruptcy20]

Thanks, out of respect for the original poster, I moved my follow-up question regarding trustee incentives to a new thread, so he/she can keep this thread a "creditor" focused thread.

[kmkm]

Thank you HHM and Bankruptcy20.

The massive amount of supporting data sent to the court by my atty hinges on the idea that the millions in equity currently held in real estate trusts by the debtor were acquired and converted to these trusts to intentionally conceal and/or prevent any creditor relief. He (the debtor) is relying on the fact the these trusts are outside the estate, therefore irrelevant.
The debtor is slipping though. He is unaware of the ineligibilty rule and the 10 year rule. He has become too egotistical and confident in using the court as his own personal weapon.