AMEX is threatening AP...

[CCCrazy]

First, I am jumping the gun here...I have not yet seen the "very threatening letter" that AMEX sent to my attorney. Hopefully, I'll get it tomorrow and not Monday. My discharge date is 6.29, a mere 2.5 weeks away - could this be a last ditch effort by AMEX to frighten me into settling? They already called my attorney before my 341 to see if I would reaffirm my 87K balance - whatever!!! Would they have already filed the Notice to Objection of Discharge by now if they were going to go that route? Ugh...I don't want to have an AP before a BK judge. My total unsecured debt is 165K, so half of that is AMEX.

Has anyone else had experience with AMEX threatening them up to the point of their discharge date? I really hope this doesn't end up in court. I was so looking forward to a fresh start on the 29th.

[justbroke]

Would they have already filed the Notice to Objection of Discharge by now if they were going to go that route?

No, usually these come after the 341 meeting. A strong sign that they mean business, is when they show up at the 341 Meeting to get you to answer questions under oath.

Ugh...I don't want to have an AP before a BK judge. My total unsecured debt is 165K, so half of that is AMEX.

No one does.

Has anyone else had experience with AMEX threatening them up to the point of their discharge date? I really hope this doesn't end up in court. I was so looking forward to a fresh start on the 29th.

I don't have any experience, but they are entitled to file a complaint (Adversary Proceeding) where they believe that the debt is non-dischargeable.

Did you use the credit to pay for any of the following...

• student debt
• property taxes
• criminal fines, traffic tickets, etc
• fraud (fraudulently using the credit -- very difficult to prove)
• cash advances within 75 days of filing
• luxury or other purchases aggregating over $600 within 90 days of filing
• to pay domestic support obligations
• or, any of the other items under 11 USC 523(a)

[CCCrazy]

thank you for the reply justbroke... AMEX did not show up at my 341 meeting. I hope AMEX is just trying to make me miserable up to the last second and then they walk away.

No, I did not use the card for any of those things you listed. I just did A LOT of shopping. And I had a good job the whole time, I still do, I had a Roth IRA I could depend on for an emergency...so I wasn't insolvent. Was I in debt? Yes? But I could make the minimum payments.

I don't have a Pacer account because I knew I would drive myself crazy checking it all the time. Ugh...I just hope that letter comes tomorrow and not Monday.

[relief13035]

No, I did not use the card for any of those things you listed. I just did A LOT of shopping.

Shopping is what I miss the most. It's not as much fun when you are using a debit card and those high credit cards limits are missing.

BUT I am adjusting and only having a mortgage and utilities bills to be concerned about anymore is a very liberating feeling.

[justbroke]

thank you for the reply justbroke... AMEX did not show up at my 341 meeting. I hope AMEX is just trying to make me miserable up to the last second and then they walk away.

I think they are just messing with ya. I wish you luck in that they don't file anything before you 60 days are up!!!

[dingdong]

Are they allowed to send threatening letters?

Isn't that a violation of the stay?

Wouldn't they just have to file an AP and then possibly settle?

I can't see how sending threatening letters is allowed during the protection of the stay, otherwise all the creditors would do it, and that is precisely why the stay is there, to protect debtors and other creditors.

Maybe I just don't get it.

But I thought they could file an AP(object to discharge of that particular debt) or do nothing?

Splain it to me Lucy!

[JRScott]

They couldn't send the letter directly to the client that is a violation of the automatic stay. They can however send such to the lawyer in hopes of some negotiation I believe. The lawyer could then pass it on to the client.

On debt that you object to being discharged you have to prove each and every line. Only those proven survive. The burden of proof is generally high to prove such and usually not worth them fighting. They probably blowing smoke in hopes of something. APs are expensive.

Any large purchases the 6 months prior to filing?

[whipster1]

IF the UST wasn't at your 341 meeting you are probably OK. They are the taxpayer paid hired guns for the unsecureds.

If AMEX does go to the trouble of filing a AP, you can probably work out a settlement for pennies on the dollar unless they have hard evidence of the factors listed above. I bet they are just yanking your chain.

[CCCrazy]

Thanks for all the support guys...man I hope you are right and they are just blowing smoke...they have been unbelieveably aggressive thru the whole thing...first AMEX calling me all the time...then one CA, and then CollectCorp who have to spawns of Satan himself...no, there were no luxury purchases 6 months before filing - I stopped paying my credit cards 7 months before filing.

Any yes, no creditors and no UST at my 341. I will let you all now the contents of the letter my lawyer is forwarding to me - hopefully I get it today, otherwise on Monday.

[Worked4Citi]

If you could have a good job and can make monthly payments... Why the Chapter 7 BK?

[justbroke]

If you could have a good job and can make monthly payments... Why the Chapter 7 BK?

Deciding to file for Bankruptcy is a lot more than having a job. There are many other factors of which you may not understand.

If a person has a job and can make monthly payments... they are forced into a Chapter 13.

[CCCrazy]

Worked4Citi...my ridiculous 2nd mortgage made it possible for me to file 7, otherwise I would be in a 13. Almost time for the mailman to arrive...hope my letter is there.

[justbroke]

This is just a troll ignore them....

I'm finally realizing that BB!

[CCCrazy]

What's a troll?

[justbroke]

What's a troll?

(Courtesy, Wikipedia)

Troll: noun, In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.