Avoid Mistakes When Planning and Filing Virginia Bankruptcy Cases

The best-planned bankruptcy cases go unnoticed. A few debtors glide through the system without attracting attention and receive full discharges in record time. Luck is not involved, but rather each successful debtor begins planning strategically a few weeks or months in advance. These debtors know something that you don’t.

Free Information About 2010 Bankruptcy Strategies

Ask a Bankruptcy Lawyer for Help – Expand Your Options Quickly

If you are thinking about filing Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy, you are not alone. Complete the form below to contact a sponsoring bankruptcy lawyer. Ask all questions you deem important without cost or obligation of any kind. Free help is only a few minutes away.

Need a Lawyer? LegalMatch allows you to present your case, and respond only to lawyers who want to help you. It's Free & Confidential.

Virginia Bankruptcy Alternatives - Debt Consolidation

The sites below were reviewed for content which is relevant to the Virginia bankruptcy issues appearing within this site. For more information regarding our selection of sites, please see our review policy. We welcome all sites submitted for review and respond to all requests within 3 business days.

Debt Consolidation Resources:

1. Debt Consolidation Resources - refresh.

Recent Notable Opinions from Virginia Bankruptcy Courts

In re Meloy, Case No. 98-31268-T before the Virginia Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District, Richmond Division, decided August 14th, 2000. The debtors originally filed a petition under Chapter 11. During reorganization, the debtors reaffirmed a debt owed to the defendant bank. Thereafter, the debtors failed to make timely payments as required by the reaffirmation agreement. The bank foreclosed upon RE securing the note and sought reimbursement for the deficiency balance. In response to the bank's attempt to collect the deficiency balance, the debtors then converted their case to Chapter 7 before the Virginia Bankruptcy Court.. All objections in connection with the Chapter 7 case were resolved and debtors received a discharge. Issue before the Virginia Bankruptcy court: Is the bank entitled to recover the deficiency balance following discharge? HELD: in this case, yes, the Virginia Bankruptcy court determined the bank may recover because the reaffirmation agreement was not specifically rescinded in the time allowed by statute. 11 USC 524 provides, in part, "(c) An agreement between a holder of a claim and the debtor, the consideration for which, in whole or in part, is based on a debt that is dischargeable in a case under this title is enforceable only to any extent enforceable under applicable nonbankruptcy law, whether or not discharge of such debt is waived, only if . . . (4) the debtor has not rescinded such [reaffirmation] agreement at any time prior to discharge or within sixty days after such agreement is filed with the court, whichever occurs later, by giving notice of rescission to the holder of such claim." In this case, the Virginia Bankruptcy court determined the debtor's  failure to provide proof of notice of recession excluded the debt from the discharge injunction.

Recent Notable Opinions of the Supreme Court of The United States:

Household Credit Services, Inc. v. Pfennig, No. 02-857 (2004), Argued February 23, 2004, Decided April 21, 2004, CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. The Truth in Lending Act (TILA) regulates disclosures credit card issuers must provide consumers and authorizes a personal cause of action for consumers based on noncompliance. 15 U.S.C. 1637(a). These disclosures must include the amount of any finance charge. 1637(b)(4). A finance charge is defined as an amount "payable directly or indirectly by the consumer, and imposed directly or indirectly by the creditor as an incident to the extension of credit."  15 U.S.C. 1605(a). Nevertheless, the Federal Reserve Board definition under Regulation Z is inconsistent by "defining a finance" charge as excluding "charges for exceeding a credit limit" (over-limit fees). Held: Regulation Z is not an unreasonable interpretation of 15 U.S.C. 1605 because respondent does not challenge the Board's authority under 15 U.S.C. 1604(a) to issue binding regulations. The Court "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress". Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842. However, if Congress "left a gap for the implementing agency to fill," the agency's regulation is "given controlling weight unless it is arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute." even though contrary to an act of Congress.  Id. at 843—844.

The websites included on this page relate in some way to filing Virginia Bankruptcy cases, whether laws, rules, discharge, reorganization or other topics . Vast bodies of law pertain to Virginia Bankruptcy proceedings and are incorporated by the courts. As new Virginia Bankruptcy laws are created each year, the coverage of this site will continue to grow.