I was told by more than one attorney that adding post-petition creditors to my CH13 schedules would enjoin those creditors from collection actions. Since I've apparently gotten misinformation from board certified BK attorneys, I would like your opinion.
The question of whether or not a creditor, once added postpetition to a Chapter 13 debtor petition, is subject to the automatic stay is not squarely answered in the case law. However, "[c]onsidering the special provision for the allowance of postpetition claims in Chapter 13 cases, it seems reasonable to stay collection actions by such creditors, pending allowance of the claim or at least absent relief from the stay granted after notice and from a hearing during the pendency of the Chapter 13 case." 7 Norton Bankr. L. & Prac. 3d § 146:20.The above is not precedent. It is the opinion of a scholarly treatise. In my opinion, the treatise' conclusion, and those of the other attorneys with whom you have corresponded is incorrect. Bankr. Code 1305(a) provides, "A proof of claim may be filed by any entity that holds a claim against the debtor -- (1) for taxes that become payable to a governmental unit while the case is pending; or (2) that is a consumer debt, that arises after the date of the order for relief under this chapter, and that is for property or services necessary for the debtor’s performance under the plan."The term, "may be filed," in the subsection, expresses the well-established interpretation that the creditor can avoid its claim becoming part of the bankruptcy estate by choosing not to file a proof of claim with the bankruptcy court. And, if the claim is not part of the estate, then it also cannot be within the scope of the bankruptcy stay -- which applies only to claims that are either part of the estate or which "arose before the commencement of the case under...[Title 11: the U.S. bankruptcy code]."BotXXXXX XXXXXne, it's up to the judge, because there's no dispositive case law precedent on the question. Hope this helps.
Thanks for such a thorough and authoritative answer.
In the matter of pre- or post-petition claims, it seems that there needs to be a further distinction: Did the liability arise before or after the petition ?
To clarify, I amended my schedule to include debts that arose after the original petition was filed.
Am I correct in understanding your opinion that, because a creditor did not file a claim (or an objection) before the plan was confirmed, they still have a claim because they are not part of the estate having not done what they were required to do ?
A. Is that a good thing ?
B. I'm sure I'll be back in touch.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).