Among issues recently litigated in bankruptcy cases were arbitration and bankruptcy fees. A recent report addressed privacy issues and attorneys’ fees arising from the filing of contracts with personal information.
An adversary complaint was filed by Paul Zimmerli and Pattie Ann Zimmerli against Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC on Jan. 24, 2009, in U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, based on the decision posted at Leagle.com. More than a year after the couple had consummated their Chapter 13 plan, Ocwen tried to force them into arbitration.
Ocwen acquired the loan Fairbanks Capital Bank, which had itself acquired the loan from Household Bank.
Ocwen claimed that it only recently discovered that there was an arbitration agreement between the Zimmerli’s and Household. Just a few days after discovering the agreement, on April 5, Ocwen filed a motion to compel arbitration and dismiss or stay the proceedings pending arbitration.
“Based on the foregoing, the court finds that the causes of action asserted in the adversary comprise a core proceeding and that enforcing the arbitration agreement would inherently conflict with the purpose and provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,” the decision stated. “Thus, the court finds that it should exercise its discretion and deny the motion.”
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., was successful in getting a bankruptcy judge to dismiss a complaint filed by Melody M. Price in U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, according to a copy of the ruling posted by Leagle.com. Chase took over the chapter 13 bankruptcy claim by Washington Mutual Bank after acquiring WaMu in 2008.
Price, who filed a voluntary Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition on April 27, 2007, alleged WaMu-Chase wrongfully assessed fees and possibly other charges to her mortgage account because it didn’t specify the amount of the fees in its initial claim. But her attorney had already acknowledged in another adversary proceeding that the disclosure requirements of § 506(b) of the Bankruptcy Code are only applicable to fees which are assessed post-petition and pre-confirmation.
“Plaintiff does not have, nor can she assert any claim, against Chase for the alleged improper assessment of fees,” the ruling stated. “This court finds that Chase’s motion to dismiss is due to be granted.”
Documents such as financial contracts filed in connection with bankruptcy cases often contain personal information that could create a privacy issue, Wilson & Associates PLLC’s Aaron Caldwell recently wrote. General Order 24 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas was issued to address this.
While requests for redaction have generally been unopposed, the debtor in one recent Arkansas case faced resistance from creditors about attorney’s fees associated with the request to restrict access to the documents. The court ruled in favor of the creditors.
PAUL WESLEY ZIMMERLI and PATTIE ANN ZIMMERLI, Plaintiffs, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Defendant.
Adversary No. 09-07003-hdh. (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas).
In re. Melody M. Price, Debtor. Melody M. Price, Plaintiff, v. Washington Mutual Bank, et al. Defendants.
Case No. 07-01905-TOM, April 27, 2007, Adversary Proceeding No. 08-00189-TOM (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division).
