Feb
09

Bankruptcy Implications of AG Settlement

Even though I was up at 4am Pacific this morning, the AG and federal government mortgage settlement was nearly old news by then. But in case you haven't heard, here is your official Credit Slips announcement--there was a $26 billion settlement.While the details are still being released, I am already concerned about how the settlement will affect bankruptcy cases. Remember that bankruptcy was one of the first places we saw the misbehavior of mortgage servicers--way back in 2005 when Tara Twomey and I did our study.

As of December 1, new Bankruptcy Rules of Procedure 3001 and 3002 impose new requirements on servicers of loans owed by bankruptcy debtors. Are the terms of the settlement consistent with those new rules? If so, do they add any new procedural benefits to protect bankrupt homeowners against robo-signing and legal violations?

The Department of Justice participated in the settlement and the U.S. Trustee's Office apparently was at the negotiating table. Their press release,  however, is just boilerplate of the general DOJ release. The only mention of bankruptcy is that the settlement will impose "new requirements to undertake pre-filing reviews of certain documents filed in bankruptcy court." I'm not sure what to make of that. Presumably, filing claims under penalty of perjury already required a review of claims, and Rule 9011 required a significant review of motions for relief from stay to permit a foreclosure to continue. What does the settlement add? I hope the US Trustee will let us know soon, as I am sure debtors' attorneys will get calls today on the issue.

An additional observation is that it is important to remember who is not a party to the settlement--the chapter 13 trustees. Those folks are not bound by the settlement, meaning that they can still challenge servicing practices that comply with the settlement, but in the professional judgment of the trustee violate bankruptcy law. Of course, the trustees are supervised by the U.S. Trustee so perhaps there will be political pressure to make the settlement the final word on the obligations of servicers in bankruptcy, but this could be an issue.

Comments and thoughts on the implications of the settlement for bankruptcy cases are very welcome!

Jan
25

And Now Featuring Melissa Jacoby

On behalf of all the Credit Slips bloggers, it is my pleasure to announce the permanent return of Professor Melissa Jacoby as one of our "Occasionals." For the past several weeks, she had doing some guest posts, but we are very happy that she has agreed to stick around. Melissa is a professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law and a leading expert on bankruptcy law with a number of prominent studies on medical debt as well as housing issues. As one of the founding members of Credit Slips, Melissa is one of the reasons we're here at all. Welcome back.

Jan
11

What is the Relationship Between Credit Cards and Mortgage Delinquency?

Previously I mentioned this new paper on homeowners in bankruptcy in the American Bankruptcy Law Journal. The central goal of the paper was to investigate what makes homeowners more or less likely to have mortgage troubles as they head into bankruptcy. One of the notable findings is that, across all the models, credit access had a significant effect on keeping mortgages current and avoiding foreclosure initiation (specifics listed pp. 302-304). But why?

The study cannot say for sure, so the discussion section (pp. 308-10) explores several hypotheses.  Maybe those with continued access to credit cards had better credit histories and were in a stronger relative financial position. Perhaps credit cards filled in other financial gaps so that a debtor could keep a mortgage current.   After all, a quarter of filers who missed mortgage payments specifically reported using credit card cash advances as a method of catching up in the two years prior to filing. 

But other studies connect the dots differently.  For example, some researchers have examined the circumstances under which homeowners prioritize credit card bills over mortgage payments, increasing the likelihood of delinquency. And, before the financial crisis, some authors raised concerns that homeowners put homes at risk by using cash-out refinancing to pay credit card debt.  

Some caveats are in order.  The paper fully explains the limits of the data and our analysis, and is looking at 2007 bankruptcy filings, so the world looks different today.  But if you have a favored hypothesis for this set of findings, please share!   

Jan
04

In or Out of Mortgage Trouble? A Study of Bankrupt Homeowners

This is a newly published paper  in the American Bankruptcy Law Journal that I was lucky to work on with Daniel McCue and Eric Belsky at the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University. Using previously unexamined data in the 2007 Consumer Bankruptcy Project, we study what makes homeowners more or less likely to have mortgage troubles as they head into bankruptcy. Although much can be said about the econometric analysis, for now I wanted to mention quickly that the paper includes descriptive details about bankrupt homeowners (debtor-reported) such as numbers of missed mortgage payments, use of adjustable rate mortgages, mortgage broker use, mobile homes, and refinancing or home equity lines of credit. So please check it out!   

Jan
04

In or Out of Mortgage Trouble? A Study of Bankrupt Homeowners

This is a newly published paper  in the American Bankruptcy Law Journal that I was lucky to work on with Daniel McCue and Eric Belsky at the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University. Using previously unexamined data in the 2007 Consumer Bankruptcy Project, we study what makes homeowners more or less likely to have mortgage troubles as they head into bankruptcy. Although much can be said about the econometric analysis, for now I wanted to mention quickly that the paper includes descriptive details about bankrupt homeowners (debtor-reported) such as numbers of missed mortgage payments, use of adjustable rate mortgages, mortgage broker use, mobile homes, and refinancing or home equity lines of credit. So please check it out!   

Jan
04

In or Out of Mortgage Trouble? A Study of Bankrupt Homeowners

This is a newly published paper  in the American Bankruptcy Law Journal that I was lucky to work on with Daniel McCue and Eric Belsky at the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University. Using previously unexamined data in the 2007 Consumer Bankruptcy Project, we study what makes homeowners more or less likely to have mortgage troubles as they head into bankruptcy. Although much can be said about the econometric analysis, for now I wanted to mention quickly that the paper includes descriptive details about bankrupt homeowners (debtor-reported) such as numbers of missed mortgage payments, use of adjustable rate mortgages, mortgage broker use, mobile homes, and refinancing or home equity lines of credit. So please check it out!   

Dec
31

GUEST POST: Debtor Education Course: Are Joe and Sally to Blame? By Attorney Russ DeMott

Russell A. DeMott is a bankruptcy and foreclosure defense attorney in South Carolina… and a regular reader of Mandelman Matters.  He graduated from the University of South Carolina School of Law in 1993 and was a staff editor and the research editor for The South Carolina Law Review.

Immediately following law school, Russ clerked for the Honorable Harry A. Beach, Circuit Court Judge in Allegan, Michigan.

For the next ten years, Russ practiced in Michigan in the areas of bankruptcy law, family law, criminal defense, and general litigation, but as the years went on, Russ focused more and more on bankruptcy law.  In 2005, Russ moved back to South Carolina to settle in the Charleston area.

In his spare time, Russ writes for his bankruptcy blog, The Charleston Bankruptcy Blog, and for Bankruptcy Law Network, a national bankruptcy blog.  Russ enjoys explaining bankruptcy concepts in plain English to lay people… like me… and he’s good at it too.

Russ truly likes helping people with financial struggles. “I view my practice as a way to level the playing field between ordinary citizens—the voters—and Corporate America—the vote buyers. I’m unapologetically on the side of the little guy.”  And you know how much I like that, right?

Today, Russ files Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy, as well as with out-of-court solutions like negotiating with creditors, and he takes on the banksters in foreclosure defense matters.

Below is an article by Russ and he’s working on his next Guest Post, coming in a couple of weeks. Look for it, it’s going to be about a very important issue that I haven’t seen discussed elsewhere.

~~~

The debtor education course. It’s the second course required by the Bankruptcy Code–the ticket out of bankruptcyat least if the debtor wants his discharge.

I confess I’ve always wondered what my clients thought of the course. Calling it a “course” is a bit much.  It only takes an hour or two, and there’s not much you can accomplish in that amount of time.  It’s more like a session.

I’ve had clients experience some really severe hardships–failed businesses, strange and unexpected medical problems, domestic problems, job losses, huge medical debts, just to name a few. So I’ve wondered if clients find the debtor education course, well, patronizing and insulting.  I’ve asked a few of them, and some do.

I got an email from a client recently who’d gone through three job losses in a short period of time, as well as some domestic relations craziness mixed in for good measure.  Her email about the debtor education course is–with her permission–reproduced below.  She writes:

“I have attached the last page displayed for that awful two hours of required federal course on bankruptcy. Obviously, it is intended as a cruel and unusual punishment in return for the act of declaring bankruptcy. There was nothing in it that was something I did not know. It is obviously intended for idiots who have never attend school, earned a penny, had a job, opened a checking account, heard of the financial market, held insurance of any kind, or made any other type of financial transaction on the face of the earth.

Perhaps those who demand these courses should take into account that some people declare bankruptcy not because they are financial idiots, but because they met unexpected financial demands. I do not believe there are courses which can be created to cover those instances – divorce, child custody, unexpected, unplanned major medical expenses.  I have met their stupid requirement.”

But you must see people who have been irresponsible with credit!

Yes, I have–and plenty.  But they all know that when they walk through my door.  This reminds me of my childhood friend and his dog, “Peanut.”  It was one of those little “wiener dogs,” a Dachshund.  When Peanut occasionally had “an accident” on the carpet in the basement, my friend’s mother would rub the little dog’s nose in it and yell at the dog.  This is the mental picture I get when I think of the debtor education requirement.  The Bankruptcy Code basically says, “you just messed on the rug you stupid little dog, and now you can pay to take a course so we can rub your nose in it.”

And there’s another side to the “irresponsible debtor” argument

The system focuses on the debtor.  Should the debtor be in a Chapter 13 instead of a Chapter 7?  Is the debtor hiding assets?  Are the debtor’s assets valued accurately? Fair enough. But just once I’d like a panel trustee or someone from the U.S. Trustee’s office jump up at a First Meeting and yell, “Why on earth did these credit card companies lend $90,000 to this couple earning only $50,000 a year?”  I’m sure they think it, but it would be fun to hear it–just once.     

Who’s got the MBA here anyway?

It’s ironic that the bankruptcy system expects Joe and Sally–many times with no college or financial education–to be so financially responsible when it’s perfectly content to have nincompoops running our financial institutions.  Folks with MBAs can destroy companies like Washington Mutual, Wachovia (bought by Wells Fargo to avert destruction), Merrill Lynch (bought by Bank of America on the eve of destruction back in 2008 and as the CEO bought an $87,000 area rug for his office), Lehman Brothers, AIG (if not for the bail out it received), and Bank of America (perhaps?–think Countrywide.)

The fact of the matter is that over the last 100 years, the Joe and Sallys of America haven’t done anything to cause depressions or recessions; it’s been the MBAs of the world who manipulate stock markets, commit fraud–think Enron or Worldcom–or otherwise wreak economic trouble. Read a book or two about the Great Depression if you have any doubts about this.  (Check out what National City Bank was up to back then!)  Now, as then, the blame for the mess we’re in can be laid at the feet of Wall Street.

There’s a perverse twist here

The perversity is that we’re regulating Joe and Sally with “bankruptcy reform” and things like the debtor education course but giving Wall Street and corporate America a pass.  And it happened at about the same time.  Our “bankruptcy reform” (which, by anyone’s account was an attempt to increase regulation on ordinary Americans) occurred between 1998 and 2005.  At the same time, in 1999, Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1934, the act which separated commercial banking from investment banking–the kind of banking where securities are underwritten and issued.  Congress also decided to leave the derivatives market unregulated, which led to the AIG mess and near financial Armageddon at the end of 2008.

The MBAs and corporate America–those with “financial education”–saw to it that the regulations put in place in 1930s during the Great Depression were swept aside. As financial regulation of Main Streetincreased, financial regulation of Wall Street decreased. (Watch “The Go Go 90s”to learn about how this happened.)

Maybe someone else’s nose should be rubbed in the mess for a change?

###

This article first appeared on the Bankruptcy Law Network.

Dec
29

Anna Nicole Smith, the Constitution, and Bankruptcy

To all law profs out there who plan to attend next week's Association of American Law Schools annual meeting, be sure not to miss the Creditors' and Debtors' Rights section program Saturday morning at 8:30.   The theme of the program:  "Marathon at 30:  A Retrospective on Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction in the Shadow of Article III."  Bankruptcy Judge J. Rich Leonard will moderate a discussion featuring Douglas Baird, Susan Block-Lieb and Troy McKenzie.  The panelists will consider, among other issues, the confusion sown by the Supreme Court in the process of resolving claims to the estate of Anna Nicole Smith's billionaire husband in Stern v. Marshall.  For some background on the case, see CS posts here, here and here

Dec
12

Bankruptcy Filings Drop for 13th Consecutive Month

Monthly Bankruptcy Filings.Jan 2004 to Nov 2011On a year-over-year basis, the U.S. bankruptcy filing rate dropped for the 13th consecutive month in November. According to statistics from Epiq Systems, Inc., the November daily bankruptcy filing rate was 4,923, a decline of 12.5% from one year ago. November marks the first time that the daily bankruptcy filing rate has dropped below 5,000 since January 2009.

Although the past seven months have seen double-digit year-over-year drops, these drops have consistently stayed between 10-17%. In other words, there is no increase in the rate of decrease. Extrapolating from this trend, we simply would expect to see about 10-17% fewer filings over the coming year than in the past year. Whether this trend continues, however, will depend principally on the ups and downs of the consumer credit market (not unemployment or foreclosure rates as conventional wisdom holds). In the next few weeks, I plan to be do my annual and slighlty more formal analysis of how these variables might interact and come up with a projection for 2012 U.S. bankruptcy filings.

The chart to the right shows the daily bankruptcy filing rate since 2004. (Clicking on the chart should open up a bigger version in a pop-up window.) The red line running across the middle of the chart is the daily filing rate in 2004, which allows for comparison between current filing rates and the filing rates prior to the 2005 changes in the bankruptcy law. The figures are population adjusted (using November 2011 as the base rate) such that the chart shows the daily bankruptcy filing rate after controlling for population growth. In 2004, the U.S. had 5.44 bankruptcy petitions per 1,000 persons. For the past twelve months, we have averaged 4.46 bankruptcy petitions per 1,000 persons. After accounting for the fact that the U.S. is almost 7% bigger now than it was in 2004, the per capita bankruptcy filing rate has dropped by 23%.

Sep
09

Bankruptcy Filings Dropping More Rapidly Than Expected

According to the most recent data from Epiq Systems, there were 120,800 bankruptcy filings in August for a daily bankruptcy filing rate of 5,250. The August daily filing rate represents a year-over-year decline of 14.8% and a decline of 3.5% from July 2011.

These latest figures represent a somewhat deeper drop in bankruptcy filings than I had expected based on my earlier forecast of a 5-10% decline for all of 2011. With the past four months showing year-over-year declines of 10% or higher, it is beginning to look like the annual decline in the bankruptcy filing rate will be above 10%.

In recent years, the last third of the year has seen, not surprisingly, about one-third of the bankruptcy filings for the year. Assuming that pattern continues, there will be between 1.41 and 1.43 million bankruptcy filings for all of 2011.

For those who like to look for economic indicators in the bankruptcy filings, you can stop right now. On a per capita basis, the U.S. bankruptcy filing rate is down 12.5% from 2004. Today, we are experiencing about 4.7 bankruptcy filings per 1,000 persons as compared to 2004 when there were 5.5 bankruptcy filings per 1,000 persons. Also, you probably can't attribute all or even most of the drop in bankruptcy filings today to the 2005 bankruptcy law. In 2009 and 2010, we were very close to the 2004 per capita bankruptcy filing rate, suggesting the currently low rate stems from other forces, most likely the ups and downs in the availability of consumer credit.

Aug
22

One More Time, With Feeling

Consumer Credit & Bankruptcy Filings Annually A Credit Slips reader pointed me to an article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution pondering why the bankruptcy rate is falling. The piece is filled with quotes about the relevance of the economy and the cost of filing bankruptcy. Most of it is wrong. For example, it is right that the cost of filing has increased since the 2005 changes to the bankruptcy law, but there is no  evidence the cost has risen in the last year. Thus, the rising cost of filing bankruptcy helps to explain why bankruptcy rates have declined relative to pre-2005 levels but not why they have declined since last year.

Regular readers will know a piece like this just pushes my buttons. Outstanding consumer credit has the strongest statistical link to the short-term ups and downs of the bankruptcy filing rate. The relationship is counter-intuitive and paradoxical. As consumer credit rises, banrkuptcy rates tend to fall in the short term. As people borrow to stave off the day of reckoning, they postpone bankruptcy. When consumer credit tightens, people are less able to borrow to satisify their current needs and, as they run out of options, are more likely to end up in a bankruptcy lawyer's office. When it comes to the economy, the bankruptcy filing rate tells us very little about the overall health of the economy. The strongest reason why bankruptcy filing rates have eased slightly is that consumer credit has become slightly more available, according to the Federal Reserve's latest release.

A previous blog post discussed at length the link between consumer credit and bankruptcy filing rates. That post featured a monthly trend line for the past few years. The relationship is long-standing, however. The graph to the right shows how bankruptcy rates tend to move with  consumer credit since 1960. (Cllicking on the graph will open a larger image, and more detail about the calculations appear at the bottom of the post.) The consumer credit axis is inverted (such that negative numbers are at the top) to make the relationship easier to see. In addtion to the "ocular regression" of just eyeballing the charts in this post and the previous post, more rigorous stastical testing verifies the relationship. (Lawless, Robert M. (2007). "The Paradox of Consumer Credit," University of Illinois Law Review, 2007:347-74.) In making a forecast of this year's bankruptcy filing rate, I relied heavily on the trend in the available of consumer credit, and the forecast has been pretty close to spot on. And, in a self-congratulatory reference (humor me by pretending the rest of this paragraph is otherwise), it is not as if these points have not been made in the New York Times instead of just this small corner of the blogosphere.

This story on bankruptcy filing rates came out just as I was preparing for our Empirical Methods course. In the first week, my co-teacher, Jen Robbennolt, and I discuss how we all like to find patterns that don't really exist. Bankruptcy attorneys might see people come into their office who are unemployed and come to the conclusion that unemployment drives the bankruptcy rate. During economic downturns, the topic of bankruptcy becomes more salient, and we are more likely to remember stories about bankruptcy. Thus, we tend to associate higher bankruptcy rates with the economic downturn.

There is at least one way, however, that all of my data analysis is wrong. The data suggests there is a tendency for consumer credit to affect bankruptcy rates. Technically, all the data suggests is that there is a relationship--causality could be moving in the other direction although I think that is unlikely. The data describes the tendency--the average effect--and by so doing fails to capture any individual case, which is both the strength and weakness of the analysis. Also, the analysis does not explain all of the variation in bankruptcy filing rates. Unemployment, economiic downturns, and other factors such as foreclosures undoubtedly play a role, but it is just that their role pales in comparison to the role of the outstanding amount of consumer credit.

Notes on the graph: The graph shows the percentage change from year-to-year for total consumer credit outstanding and total bankruptcy filings. The right axis for consumer credit is inverted to allow a clearer understanding of the inverse relationship between the two data series. Total consumer credit, which includes both revolving and nonrevolving credit, is taken from the Federal Reserve Statistical Release G.19 on consumer credit. The bankruptcy filing data are from the Administrative Office for U.S. Courts. Because of limits on the availability of old bankruptcy filing data, all data are for the twelth months ending June 30 for the year shown or as of June 30 for the consumer credit changes.

Aug
22

One More Time, With Feeling

Consumer Credit & Bankruptcy Filings Annually A Credit Slips reader pointed me to an article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution pondering why the bankruptcy rate is falling. The piece is filled with quotes about the relevance of the economy and the cost of filing bankruptcy. Most of it is wrong. For example, it is right that the cost of filing has increased since the 2005 changes to the bankruptcy law, but there is no  evidence the cost has risen in the last year. Thus, the rising cost of filing bankruptcy helps to explain why bankruptcy rates have declined relative to pre-2005 levels but not why they have declined since last year.

Regular readers will know a piece like this just pushes my buttons. Outstanding consumer credit has the strongest statistical link to the short-term ups and downs of the bankruptcy filing rate. The relationship is counter-intuitive and paradoxical. As consumer credit rises, banrkuptcy rates tend to fall in the short term. As people borrow to stave off the day of reckoning, they postpone bankruptcy. When consumer credit tightens, people are less able to borrow to satisify their current needs and, as they run out of options, are more likely to end up in a bankruptcy lawyer's office. When it comes to the economy, the bankruptcy filing rate tells us very little about the overall health of the economy. The strongest reason why bankruptcy filing rates have eased slightly is that consumer credit has become slightly more available, according to the Federal Reserve's latest release.

A previous blog post discussed at length the link between consumer credit and bankruptcy filing rates. That post featured a monthly trend line for the past few years. The relationship is long-standing, however. The graph to the right shows how bankruptcy rates tend to move with  consumer credit since 1960. (Cllicking on the graph will open a larger image, and more detail about the calculations appear at the bottom of the post.) The consumer credit axis is inverted (such that negative numbers are at the top) to make the relationship easier to see. In addtion to the "ocular regression" of just eyeballing the charts in this post and the previous post, more rigorous stastical testing verifies the relationship. (Lawless, Robert M. (2007). "The Paradox of Consumer Credit," University of Illinois Law Review, 2007:347-74.) In making a forecast of this year's bankruptcy filing rate, I relied heavily on the trend in the available of consumer credit, and the forecast has been pretty close to spot on. And, in a self-congratulatory reference (humor me by pretending the rest of this paragraph is otherwise), it is not as if these points have not been made in the New York Times instead of just this small corner of the blogosphere.

This story on bankruptcy filing rates came out just as I was preparing for our Empirical Methods course. In the first week, my co-teacher, Jen Robbennolt, and I discuss how we all like to find patterns that don't really exist. Bankruptcy attorneys might see people come into their office who are unemployed and come to the conclusion that unemployment drives the bankruptcy rate. During economic downturns, the topic of bankruptcy becomes more salient, and we are more likely to remember stories about bankruptcy. Thus, we tend to associate higher bankruptcy rates with the economic downturn.

There is at least one way, however, that all of my data analysis is wrong. The data suggests there is a tendency for consumer credit to affect bankruptcy rates. Technically, all the data suggests is that there is a relationship--causality could be moving in the other direction although I think that is unlikely. The data describes the tendency--the average effect--and by so doing fails to capture any individual case, which is both the strength and weakness of the analysis. Also, the analysis does not explain all of the variation in bankruptcy filing rates. Unemployment, economiic downturns, and other factors such as foreclosures undoubtedly play a role, but it is just that their role pales in comparison to the role of the outstanding amount of consumer credit.

Notes on the graph: The graph shows the percentage change from year-to-year for total consumer credit outstanding and total bankruptcy filings. The right axis for consumer credit is inverted to allow a clearer understanding of the inverse relationship between the two data series. Total consumer credit, which includes both revolving and nonrevolving credit, is taken from the Federal Reserve Statistical Release G.19 on consumer credit. The bankruptcy filing data are from the Administrative Office for U.S. Courts. Because of limits on the availability of old bankruptcy filing data, all data are for the twelth months ending June 30 for the year shown or as of June 30 for the consumer credit changes.

Aug
16

Bankruptcy Politics and State Bankruptcy

I have a new paper out, Bankrupt Politics and the Politics of Bankruptcy, that examines state bankruptcy proposals and then uses them as a jumping-off point for sketching out a political theory of bankruptcy as a "creditor's armistice," an unstable political bargain, rather than an economic bargain ala Jackson & Baird's "creditor's bargain."  

The paper argues that bankruptcy is unlikely to do much good for the states because states' fiscal woes are akin to business model problems, rather than simple overleverage, and bankruptcy cannot fix business models.  States' business model--US fiscal federalism--is an inherently procyclical business model that is exacerbated by a moral hazard problem in state politics. Bankruptcy can no more fix this bad business model than it can make a buggy whip manufacturer (or a brick-and-mortar bookstore or video store) a viable operation.  

The intensely and patently political nature of the issues raised by state bankruptcy show a major set of deficiencies in contractarian theories of bankruptcy law, which have been developed primarily in the business bankruptcy context.  While others (such as our former co-blogger Elizabeth Warren) have criticized the creditors' bargain for failing to account for all of the stakeholders in bankruptcies, I argue that the inclusion or exclusion of various interests in bankruptcy is itself an essential part of a dynamic system of competing rent-seeking interests.

I don't attempt a formal exposition of an alternative political theory of bankruptcy in this paper--that's for another day--instead, I use this paper to lay out the idea and start linking the sovereign debt, subnational debt, business debt, and consumer debt literatures into a "unified theory" (yeah, I'm going to aim big, why not?) of debt restructuring (as in bankruptcy with a small "b").  The abstract is below the break:

The most recent round of state budget crises has resulted in calls to permit states to file for bankruptcy in order to restructure and reduce their financial obligations. This Article argues that these proposals are misguided because states’ financial distress is primarily a political problem created by fiscal federalism – the financial relationship between the federal government and the states – and exacerbated by political agency problems. Accordingly, state bankruptcy proposals need to be evaluated in political, rather than financial terms. 

Bankruptcy can no more remake fiscal federalism than it can fix a firm with an untenable business model. While bankruptcy might provide a tool for mitigating political agency problems, it is more likely to be used to provide judicial cover for partisan agendas. 

Attempts to use bankruptcy to solve political problems invite a reevaluation of the “creditors’ bargain,” the dominant theory of bankruptcy law, which argues that bankruptcy law tries to replicate the bargain that creditors would have made themselves. This Article argues that contractarian approaches to bankruptcy are necessarily incomplete because they do not account for the politics of bankruptcy. 

Instead, this Article sketches out a new theory of bankruptcy law as the dynamic “armistice line” between competing interest groups. Bankruptcy is fundamentally a distributional exercise and the shape of bankruptcy law is an expression of distributional norms and interest group politics rather than an exercise in economic efficiency. A proper theoretical understanding of bankruptcy must therefore commence from a political rather than economic perspective.
Jun
08

The Great Unwind and the Final Redemption, by O. Max Gardner III

When it comes to bankruptcy law, fighting for the rights of American consumers, and knowledge of our latest economic collapse, I cannot think of anyone that knows more than Max Gardner.  And that’s not just anyone saying that, I’ve written almost 300 articles on these and related topics, so I’ve called or emailed  just about everyone on planet that’s supposed to be an “expert” at one thing or another, and Max stands alone.

In my mind, there are three things that make Max special:

  1. He speaks English fluently… I mean English even I can understand.  It doesn’t matter what the subject is, if Max explains it, my 6th grade class would get it.  I’m sure he can legalese with the best of them, but he doesn’t do it in public, and I for one appreciate that… a lot.
  2. He’s a teacher and a doer… The old axiom says that those who can’t do, teach, but Max completely shatters that idea.  He teaches lawyers through his famous Bankruptcy Boot Camp program, but he’s also very much a practicing attorney.  So, when he tells me something, I know it’s not just a theory, it’s a fact.
  3. He truly understands… There are many who have knowledge, but not everyone “understands” and cares about what people are going through, and I knew from the first time I talked with Max that he does.

Okay, so what can I tell you, I love the guy, and I’m very much looking forward to attending his Bankruptcy Boot Camp at the beginning of July.  And you can count on me writing a lot about what I learn while I’m there.

So… as my readers know, I’ve never had guest columnists or posted what others have written, but when I read the article that follows, which was written by Max and his associate Bob Goodwin on June 1st of this year, and then found myself reading sections of it to several people while we were talking on the phone, well… I knew I had to post it.

Max and I are talking about publishing some things together in the future as well, and I think we’ll make a great team.  He’s got the knowledge and then some, and I’ll do the jokes.  LOL

So… here it is… I know you’ll enjoy the article that follows, but I’m also sure you’ll learn something important as well.  I know I sure did.  It’s titled: The Great Unwind and the Final Redemption, by O. Max Gardner III, but you can think of him as “Max”.

The Great Unwind and the Final Redemption

Written on June 1, 2010 by O. Max Gardner III with Bob Goodwin

What we are experiencing is called the global credit crisis for a reason. There is too much debt in the world. There is too much oil in the Gulf of Mexico and too little oil in the rest of the world.  What used to be up now seems to be down.  The stock market is going up on Monday and dropping more than 1,000 points Tuesday afternoon.  The economy is in a “recovery mode” but the unemployment numbers keep going up and up and up.  What is wrong with these pictures?

More and more economists are talking about the threat of a deflationary crisis ahead. Some are discussing hyperinflation.  Others refer to a “double-dip” recession.  A few even predict another depression.  What we know for sure is that Greece, Italy and Spain are broke.  The Euro has lost more value than the latest big fish just lost in Vegas.  Foreclosures are at historic highs and unemployment keeps going up.

So, what does this mean for you? Well, if you have a house that is under water, or more debt than you can reasonably hope to repay, your best options may be the unthinkable as in filing for personal bankruptcy. But it really should not be unthinkable to default on a loan or even to declare bankruptcy. Don’t stop reading. It is really a good option for many; it is moral, legal and good for the country. It has also become very common. You and your children will look back in a generation with pride.

In small amounts, debt is good. Home ownership is only possible for the young with mortgages, and many college degrees seem to be totally supported with student loans (don’t get me started on student loan debt). Working capital for growing businesses allow for inventory and distribution expenses. Lenders benefit as well: high interest rates are paid to pensioners on their life savings.

When debt exceeds a certain level it becomes a cancer on society. Easy credit fuels speculation which triggers bubbles. These bubbles lead to a temporary lift in apparent wealth, which increases economic activity beyond its sustainable level. But eventually more and more debt triggers economic decline with the inevitable glut of goods produced by an overheated economy.

What people are discovering too late is that their debt is not repayable. Not now, not in the future, not ever. They once had a hope they could wait out their bad times. This is true of many homeowners, many businesses and many governmental bodies. The “great unwind” is now upon us and is picking up reverse speed every day.  And, the unwind is going to be deflationary. Prices and salaries will decline, jobs will become more scarce, and debt will continue to increase.

The earlier you pull the rip cord the better off you will be later. In many states mortgage loans are non-recourse debts. This means that the homeowner has no personal liability for the debt after foreclosure.  Never make another mortgage payment in these states. Turn over the keys after foreclosure. You will lose all of your down payment, but the lender can never get another penny from you. Your credit score will fall. But you do not want any more credit. Right? If you are trying to quit crack, how would feel about your pusher reducing your crack score? Does that make sense?  If you plan to fight the war on drugs, you fight to win, right?  Stay off crack (I mean credit) for a few years, and they will take you back with open arms.  Just be sure to look before you leap back into the credit patch.

There should no longer be any moral question about whether it is wrong to walk away from debt legally. The advent of limited liability corporations and the legal ‘personhood’ of corporate shells have allowed business to create one sided bets for years, and they happily walk away from “corporate debt” when the tide shifts. Donald Trump, the famed “Donald”, surely knows how to play this game.  The Donald is a credit gamer.  Whatever you say about Trump, the guy is a real player at in the debt cancellation game.  This may even be the basis for a new show—The Bankrupt.

But, Trump is not the exception to the rule.  The Trumpum tactics are the calculus of 21st century finance, and you are a bit player in this game.  The Big Players are General Motors, Chrysler, Lehman Brothers,   Bear Stearns, Washington Mutual and Countrywide.  They have either eliminated their heavy debt-loads by bankruptcies or by forced liquidations and mergers with the FDIC picking up the financial pieces.  And, even the Great Mortgage Bankers Association of America recently accepted a $40 million dollar short sale and walked-away from its former world headquarters on K Street in Washington along with about $45 million in unpaid debt.  If you want to talk about moral hazards, then these are the players to talk about.  Forget about John and Mary Smith on Main Street.  John and Mary are mere pebbles in the sand on a very large beach.  Nobody notices John and Mary and from my point of view nobody in Washington really cares.

The current administration is implementing a policy of recapitalizing the banks (whose assets are still worth far less than their own debts) by lending them money through the Fed for nothing and borrowing back the money through the treasury for a lot more. This is called transferring debt from the banks to the government. But government debt has the same drag on societies in the long-run, they can just hold their breath longer.  And, the so-called HAMP program is nothing more than a smoke and mirrors game designed to make us think that something is being done when in fact nothing is happening other than secretly extending the day of the final reckoning.  In short, there is no value in the Net Present Value Test of HAMP.

In the end debt default always occurs in these situations. The debts cannot be paid by the combined debtors in a society. The default may occur when inflation destroys the value of the debt over time. Or the default may occur with the eventual death of the debtor. Or the debt is discharged legally.

The longer this process takes, the more damage occurs to the society. And this process, in my view, is the true moral hazard for America.  The hazard of not legally and effectively dealing with these mountains of consumer debt.  There are strange incentives that a person has when their debt is unpayable. Why would you try to earn more? The more you earn the more debt you pay. But you cannot earn enough to get out of debt. So you stop trying. If you owe too much on your house, you might decide you have nothing more to lose on your house so you will simply decide to wait it out. You will minimize the repairs and improvements on the house, rent the house out to frat boys and hope for the best.  You might as well best your nest-eggs on winning the Power Ball next Wednesday. The odds are not in your favor.  The wait it out strategy will only prolong the financial and emotional agony.

The banks are great examples of distorted incentives. They have sucked up well over $3 trillion of government money. They are still paying huge bonuses. They are not lending to businesses in need. They are not lending to consumers.  They have “raised” their consumer credit standards.  They have not changed any of their prior internal “standards.”  Distorted incentives indeed.

In the ancient days the Christian nations would have a debt Jubilee every 30 years. It sounds like a party because it was. Debts were forgiven en-masse when societies became constipated with debt.  And, in the days of the Old Testament, individual debts were discharged once every 7 years.  It was also considered a sin to try and collect debts after this 7 year discharge.

Suffice it to say we are currently a nation of many, many sinners, the vast majority of whom are trying to collect debts owed by consumers.  The only way to run these money changers out of the temple, and to secure true redemption, is to declare personal bankruptcy.  You need to legally purge yourself of your debts and your houses and your expensive cars and start working for yourself and for your family.  Praise the Lord and pass around those bankruptcy petitions.  Like now. Like yesterday.

O. Max Gardner III & Bob Goodwin

Dec
13

Real estate firm Fairfield files for bankruptcy

Privately-held real estate company Fairfield Residential LLC filed for bankruptcy protection on Sunday, saying that the collapse of the U.S. real estate and capital markets has made it difficult to continue without restructuring.







United StatesReal estateBankruptcyLawServices

Aug
05

CONSUMER BANKRUPTCY FILINGS REACH HIGHEST MONTHLY TOTAL SINCE 2005 BANKRUPTCY LAW OVERHAUL

” U.S. consumer bankruptcy filings reached 126,434 in July, the highest monthly total since the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act was implemented in October 2005, according to the American Bankruptcy Institute (ABI), relying on data from the National Bankruptcy Research Center (NBKRC).”