One
of the most important and influential aspects of Bankruptcy is the Automatic
Stay. The Automatic Stay is just that,
automatic. As soon as the bankruptcy
petition is filed, all of a debtor’s creditors are stayed (prohibited) from
making any attempts whatsoever to take any property, money, income, etc., from
the debtor. This means that all
lawsuits, phone calls, repossessions, foreclosure proceedings, EVERYTHING must
immediately stop otherwise the debtor can receive money damages from the
creditor for a stay violation.
Now just focusing only on Chapter
13 cases, a creditor does have the right to ask the court for permission to be
relieved from the stay (Motion for Relief from Stay), for instance, in order to
repossess a car that the debtor is not paying for or is uninsured. Furthermore, many times in a bankruptcy a
debtor will voluntarily surrender a car or home to the creditor. When this
happens, the creditor usually does not need permission from the court to
recover the collateral, as such permission is typically included in a
confirmation order. Here is an example
from an actual order: “The plan
surrenders the debtors interest in collateral to the creditors listed below. The
automatic stay has been lifted to allow these creditors to repossess the
collateral upon which they have liens.”
Well when the stay is lifted, does that mean the creditor can begin
harassing the debtor again? As counsel
for debtors, we say no; however, there are creditors who say yes! While in my research I have yet to find a
case that addresses this particular issue, I found many cases that are
analogous.
For example, a reaffirmation
agreement is a voluntary agreement between a debtor and creditor that allows a
debt to be exempt from discharge and remain in effect after the bankruptcy (This
is done for debtors who wish to keep cars or houses). It has been held by many bankruptcy courts
that a creditor can contact debtors about such an agreement since both parties
have this right. However, litigation soon followed because the creditor was
trying to harass the debtor into such an agreement. Courts have held that while a creditor is
allowed to contact the debtor for this purpose, the creditor cannot do so
through harassment, threats, or coercion, as this defeats the purpose of the
Bankruptcy Code protections.
Usually, when property is being
surrendered, the discourse between the creditor and debtor is tranquil and they
arrange a time for the surrendered car to be picked up or a time limit for the
debtor to move out of a house. There is
currently a case going on right now where the debtors moved out of their house,
which was surrendered, two years prior but are still getting harassing and threatening
phone calls about transferring the property.
Though the stay had been lifted, the debtors are contending that like
reaffirmation agreements, surrenders cannot be coercive. It will be interesting to see how the case
turns out.