About Me
Craig D. Robins, Esq. New York Bankruptcy Attorney, Longisland bankruptcy attorney

“ Craig D. Robins, Esq., has been a practicing Long Island bankruptcy attorney for over twenty-four years ”

Craig D. Robins, Esq.

Archive for September, 2009

Advance Planning: File Bankruptcy Before You Get a Year-End Bonus

Posted on Tuesday (September 29, 2009) at 9:15 pm to Bankruptcy Means Test
Bankruptcy Tips Consumers Should Know
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
Issues Involving New Bankruptcy Laws

Those consumers who are planning to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief, and who are also expecting year-end bonuses, should engage in advance bankruptcy planningWritten by Craig D. Robins, Esq.
Christmas bonuses are now less than 90 days away.  This notion is important because receiving a Christmas bonus or year-end bonus for some people can adversely skew the bankruptcy means test and make them ineligible for Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

The Bankruptcy Means Test
The bankruptcy means test is a very comprehensive, very complex series of calculations that the federal government designed to ascertain whether someone qualifies for Chapter 7 filing.  It was designedas part of the new bankruptcy laws to prevent those consumers who have high incomes from being able to eliminate their debts in Chapter 7 cases.  See my post, The Means Test is Often the Key to a Successful Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case .  The means test looks at all income you received during the prior six calendar months. 
Year-End Bonuses Must Be Included in the Means Test if Received Six Months Before Filing Bankruptcy
Some people just barely qualify for Chapter 7 filing because they just barely pass the means test.  If you are on the edge of being eligible, adding a significant year-end bonus into the calculation of income can preclude you from being able to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief.
What this means: if you receive a substantial Christmas bonus in December, you might have to wait as many as six months before being eligible for Chapter 7 filing, because the means test requires that you add up all income received in the previous six calendar months.
Consider Filing Bankruptcy Sooner than Later If Expecting a Christmas Bonus
What you should do now:  if you are considering filing for bankruptcy, and your income appears to be substantial, you should file bankruptcy before getting any year-end bonus. 
How do you know if your income is considered substantial enough?  The only way to find out is to consult with an experienced consumer bankruptcy attorney.
One additional caveat: if you know for sure that you are receiving a year-end bonus, then this should be reported on the bankruptcy petition budget schedules as anticipated future income.  Doing so has no effect on the means test, but may nevertheless show that there is extra income in your budget.  An experienced bankruptcy attorney can discuss how to deal with this concept.
Right now, so many companies are cutting back that there may be no way to know if you are going to receive a Christmas bonus this year.  Thus, you may be better off filing sooner, rather than later, because at some point between now and Christmas, your employer may inform you that you will receive a year-end bonus.
Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

A New Powerful Mortgage Foreclosure Defense — Compliments of MERS

Posted on Monday (September 28, 2009) at 11:58 pm to Foreclosure Defense
Mortgages & Sub-Prime Mortgage Meltdown

MERS (the Mortgage and Electronic Registration System) may have just given homeowners a new mortgage foreclosure defenseWritten by Craig D. Robins, Esq.
“The Mortgage Machine Backfires.”  That was the title of a fantastic and incredibly interesting article in yesterday’s New York Times.
Times business columnist Gretchen Morgenson wrote about a recent Kansas Supreme Court case which lambasted a “dubious practice” that mortgagees have relied on for several years now.  The principles discussed in that case have the stunning potential of operating as an absolute defense in mortgage foreclosure proceedings throughout the country and especially on Long Island.
“MERS” — The Mortgage Electronic Registration System
We are all used the standard recording process whereby deeds and mortgages are recorded with the county clerk.  However, during the recent mortgage lending spree, mortgage loans changed hands constantly, often ending up in packaged and securitized mortgage pools.  The Times characterized the constant changing of mortgage ownership as a “dizzying series of transactions.”
Each time a mortgage is recorded there is a hefty recording fee.  To save money, the mortgage industry, including Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, set up MERS to record mortgage assignments electronically.
MERS estimates that it saved its members about $1 billion during the previous decade.  There are about 60 million mortgage loans that are registered in the name of MERS!
The MERS flaw:  It does not own mortgages but merely records them in the MERS name
Not only does MERS register mortgages, it also began registering the various mortgage assignments and transfers.  However, when it registered anything with a county clerk, it registered the mortgage in the name of MERS.  And herein lies the significant flaw that may now become an incredible problem for all MERS mortgages.  Even though MERS listed itself as the owner of the mortgage in the public records of county clerks across the country, it did not actually own any of the mortgages.
If MERS is only an Electronic Registry, How can it bring foreclosure actions?
One of the basic tenets of mortgage foreclosure law is that the mortgagee must have standing to bring the foreclosure action, which means it must own the mortgage being foreclosed upon.  I successfully persuaded the Nassau County Supreme Court a few months ago to dismiss a foreclosure for this very reason.  See my post:  Long Island Foreclosure Case Dismissed!
Even though MERS may not technically have standing, it nevertheless brought great numbers of foreclosure proceedings.  Some mortgage foreclosure defense lawyers asserted that MERS did not have legal standing to sue.  After all, how can an electronic registry with no mortgage ownership claim that it has the right to evict people from their homes?  However, judges initially rejected those arguments and allowed the MERS foreclosure actions to proceed.
A pivotal case from the Kansas Supreme Court may now preclude MERS from asserting that it has standing
Rather than get into the details of the Kansas Supreme Court case, the court held that a mortgagee’s use of MERS to register the mortgage was insufficient to enable the mortgagee to assert any rights.  This, in essence, totally rejected the MERS’s business model.
This decision from a state’s highest court is quite important because it may likely encourage judges elsewhere to question MERS’s standing in their foreclosure cases.
There are other potentially far-reaching implications.  For example, there can be an issue as to the priority of mortgage liens if a MERS mortgage is not recognized.
From a bankruptcy perspective, aggressive and creative Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustees can argue that mortgagees do not have a valid security interest and that a debtor’s home can therefore be liquidated without worrying about the mortgagee as a secured creditor.
As I have frequently written in the past, I refuse to do mortgage modifications.  One of the primary reasons is because it is impossibly difficult to reach the appropriate individuals who have the authority to discuss a mortgage workout.  Now we are learning that MERS is quite responsible for this.  The MERS system has led to great confusion as borrowers are unable to identify who they should turn to.
The Kansas case is certainly a stunning victory for homeowners.  It will be interesting to see the fallout from this case.  Click here to read the New York Times article.
Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Empire Masonry Contracting Corp. Files Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Petition

Posted on Saturday (September 26, 2009) at 8:30 am to Chapter 11 Filings on Long Island

Long Island Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case InformationWritten by Craig D. Robins, Esq.

Empire Masonry Contracting Corp.of East Setauket, New York, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy relief on September 14, 2009 in the Central Islip Bankruptcy Court under case number 8-09-76876. Judge Robert E. Grossman is the assigned bankruptcy judge.

This is a Chapter 11 case that is one of my own cases that I, Long Island Chapter 11 bankruptcy attorney, Craig D. Robins, Esq., filed.  The amount of the pre-petition retainer for legal fees and disbursements was $15,039.

The debtor provides commercial masonry services in the New York metropolitan area, has several ongoing jobs, and is solvent and operating profitably.  It has gross revenues of several million dollars per year.

According to the Chapter 11 Affidavit filed with the Court, the debtor fell behind with its financial obligations and now requires bankruptcy relief because several large, slow-paying accounts drove the debtor into a position of low liquidity, preventing the debtor from maintaining timely payments  to creditors, primarily withholding taxes it owes to the Internal Revenue Service.

In addition, the type of contracting services the debtor provides requires that a portion of each contract be set aside as “retainage” until the completion of construction. Despite the retainage amounts being held back as assurance for the quality of work, the retainage sums recently have taken an extended time to obtain.The debtor anticipates quickly obtaining confirmation of a Chapter 11 plan of reorganization which will enable it to pay all creditors in full.

The Meeting of creditors will be held on October 16, 2009 at the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York in Central Islip (Room 562 at 10:00 a.m.).  The first Status Conference before Judge Grossman has not yet been scheduled.

This post is one of a series of posts available on the Long Island Bankruptcy Blog detailing every Chapter 11 bankruptcy case filed in the Central Islip Bankruptcy Court since August 1, 2009.  I will typically post a summary of each Chapter 11 case several days or weeks after it is filed as not all info is available immediately upon filing.  To see a list of Chapter 11 cases profiled on this blog, click Chapter 11 Filings on Long Island or type the name of the debtor in the upper right search box.

Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Pro Se Debtor, Deodath Ramcharan, Files Chapter 11 Petition Without Attorney

Posted on Thursday (September 24, 2009) at 3:00 pm to Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
Chapter 11 Filings on Long Island
Chapter 13 Bankruptcy

Long Island Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case InformationWritten by Craig D. Robins, Esq.

Debtor goes it alone after Chapter 13 case was dismissed for jurisdictional ineligibility

Deodath Ramcharan, an individual, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy relief on September 8, 2009 in the Central Islip Bankruptcy Court under case number 8-09-76724. Judge Alan S. Trust is the assigned bankruptcy judge.

This is the debtor’s second bankruptcy filing this year.  He filed the current Chapter 11 petition without any legal representation.  The debtor lives in Wyandanch.
The debtor previously filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy relief while represented by Long Island bankruptcy attorney, Richard F. Arturo, on April 15, 2009.  At that time,  the debtor owed substantial mortgage arrears on five mortgages covering four separate properties in Wyandanch and Brooklyn. 
That case was dismissed on July 6, 2009 after Chapter 13 trustee Marianne DeRosa brought a motion to dismiss, citing the fact that the debtor had too much debt to be eligible for Chapter 13 relief.  Apparently, the debtor’s Schedule D, which was filed with the petition, indicated that the debtor’s secured debt was $1,235,000.
In that prior case, since this debtor’s secured debt exceeded the jurisdictional limit of $1,010,650 as set forth in Bankruptcy Code § 109(e), the debtor was not eligible for relief under Chapter 13 and the Court was required to dismiss the case. 
In order to be eligible for Chapter 13 bankruptcy relief, a debtor simply cannot have secured debt greater than $1,010,650, or unsecured debt greater than $336,900.  See large debt requires Chapter 11 filing.  Arguably, the Chapter 13 petition should not have been filed at all because of the large amount of debt.
The debtor then filed his second case on September 8, 2009, “pro se” without retaining counsel.  The petition was handwritten and lacked almost every schedule and exhibit.  As of this date, the debtor has neglected to file all of the deficient schedules and exhibits, even though their due date has passed, meaning that the Court has the ability to immediately dismiss the case.
As far as I am aware, there have been exceptionally few pro se Chapter 11 cases in the Long Island Bankruptcy Court and every single one has been dismissed relatively quickly.  Although I wish this debtor good luck, the complexities of Chapter 11 bankruptcy practice are extremely challenging even for bankruptcy practitioners, and virtually impossible for lay people.
To make matters worse, if the debtor was hoping to get the benefit of the automatic bankruptcy stay, that will not happen for much longer.  When a debtor files a second bankruptcy case in the same one-year period that a prior bankruptcy case was pending, the stay only lasts 30 days unless a motion is immediately brought to extend the stay.  According to the court’s docket, the debtor neglected to timely bring such a motion.  See Consumer Bankruptcy Debtors Face New Limitations for Repeat Filings .  That means that the mortgagees will likely have the right to continue their foreclosure proceedings in just two weeks.

Nevertheless, the Meeting of creditors will be held on October 9, 2009 at the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York in Central Islip (Room 562 at 9:00 a.m.).  The first Status Conference before Judge Trust has not yet been scheduled.

This post is one of a series of posts available on the Long Island Bankruptcy Blog detailing every Chapter 11 bankruptcy case filed in the Central Islip Bankruptcy Court since August 1, 2009.  I will typically post a summary of each Chapter 11 case several days or weeks after it is filed as not all info is available immediately upon filing.  To see a list of Chapter 11 cases profiled on this blog, click Chapter 11 Filings on Long Island or type the name of the debtor in the upper right search box.

Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Federal Crackdown on Mortgage Modification Companies

Posted on Wednesday (September 23, 2009) at 1:00 am to Consumer Advice
Foreclosure Defense
Mortgages & Sub-Prime Mortgage Meltdown

Written by Craig D. Robins, Esq.

Federal Agencies are planning to restrict fees charged by mortgage modification companiesGovernment considers placing restrictions on loan modification companies

Fraudulent mortgage rescue schemes is reaching an “epidemic.” This is what several federal and state agencies said last week in a joint press conference as they pledged to increase efforts to investigate and crack down on loan modification abuse and companies offering help for homeowners.

Many Americans who have been caught hard by the recession and are scrambling to avoid foreclosure have become easy prey to dishonest mortgage modification companies.

.This is especially prevalent here on Long Island where I regularly meet with clients in my Long Island foreclosure defense and bankruptcy practice. I frequently hear tales of woe from clients who paid thousands of dollars upfront to companies who promised them the moon, but sadly produced absolutely no results.

 See my previous post:  Can You Trust a Mortgage Modification Company?

Many, many dishonest mortgage modification firms across the country

Now the Federal Trade Commission is considering an outright ban on upfront mortgage modification fees because so many dishonest companies have taken advantage of innocent homeowners.

In addition, the U.S. Treasury, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Justice Department said they plan to alert financial institutions to emerging mortgage modification schemes, step up enforcement actions and educate consumers.

The FTC also said that when a mortgage modification firm asks for an advance fee, it’s a red flag that the service is bogus.

Another common problem involves the many companies who use deceptive advertising that is designed to trick consumers into thinking that they are participating in a government program.

Meanwhile, the FBI announced that it has over 2,600 mortgage fraud cases open, most of which involve substantial losses of more than $1 million.

Some Long Island homeowners have actually lost their homes because they relied upon mortgage modification companies to save them, but the companies utterly failed to do anything other than take their money.

A statement made by the Governor of Connecticut summed up well the current sentiment at the press conference: “These mortgage rescue scams raise false hopes and then cruelly exploit them, which is why my office is fighting them and welcomes the federal government as a strong ally.”

Free Housing Counselors

Although my office provides bankruptcy and foreclosure defense legal services, we do not do mortgage modifications. For that, we recommend obtaining free help from government-approved housing counselors..

Homeowners can locate free government-approved housing counselors at http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov or by calling (888) 995-HOPE.

Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Bankruptcy Cartoon Strip BAPCPA Man — #5

Posted on Tuesday (September 22, 2009) at 2:30 am to Bankruptcy Humour

BAPCPA Man -- The Bankruptcy Cartoon Strip (#5) .
BAPCPA Man Shows that Bankruptcy Can Be Humorous!
Written by Craig D. Robins, Esq.
I am pleased to post the fifth cartoon strip of BAPCPA MAN, the new comic strip from New York bankruptcy attorney Steven Horowitz and and artist Gideon Kendall.   Here is strip number five.   BAPCPA MAN is designed to entertain both consumers and bankruptcy attorneys. 
Steve and Gideon originally came up with the well-received Bankruptcy Bill cartoon strips, about a hapless New York City bankruptcy attorney associate at a large bankruptcy firm.
“BAPCPA”, an acronym universally known to all bankruptcy attorneys, stands for The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act.  This is the new bankruptcy law that went into effect in 2005.
The strips seek to educate consumers, humor attorneys, and will also try to poke fun at some of the more ridiculous requirements of the new bankruptcy law.  Please check out the Bankruptcy Bill and BAPCPA Man Website which now has references and links to other bankruptcy blogs around the country.
The strip is posted with permission from Bankruptcy Bill.
Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Can Matrimonial Settlements Survive Bankruptcy?

Posted on Monday (September 21, 2009) at 3:30 pm to Matrimonial Issues & Bankruptcy
Suffolk Lawyer

Recent bankruptcy case will make it harder for bankruptcy trustees to set aside matrimonial settlementsby Craig D. Robins, Esq.
Recent bankruptcy decision protects divorce transfers
With bankruptcy filings so prevalent these days, and divorce being a major reason for seeking bankruptcy relief, matrimonial attorneys are frequently concerned as to whether a divorce settlement will hold up in a bankruptcy proceeding.
Fraudulent Transfer Theory 
Here’s the reason for concern: If a debtor transfers a valuable asset to a spouse (or soon-to-be ex-spouse) prior to filing for bankruptcy, and the debtor-spouse does not receive reasonable value in return, then the transfer is deemed a “fraudulent transfer.” In such a case, the bankruptcy trustee can sue the person who received the asset to bring it back into the bankruptcy estate, so that all creditors can share in its value.  One additional element of a fraudulent transfer is that the debtor must have been insolvent at the time of transfer.
The general principle for demonstrating that a transfer was not a fraudulent transfer is to show that there was “reasonably equivalent value.”
Since a divorcing spouse will frequently enter into a matrimonial settlement by giving the other spouse valuable assets such as an interest in real estate, bank accounts, investments, or other personal property, both parties do not want a bankruptcy trustee to try to set the transfer aside.
For a period of time, some courts have held that innocent spouses who received such a transfer were no different from any other party who received a large transfer without sufficient consideration.
However, a case just decided by the United States Circuit Court of Appeals will give many divorcing spouses greater comfort that a trustee will not be able to set aside a marital settlement.
Recent Circuit Case
In the Matter of Bledsoe, decided June 25, 2009, the Ninth Circuit had to decide under what circumstances a bankruptcy court may avoid a transfer made pursuant to a state-court divorce decree.
I previously mentioned this case in an article two years ago, when Long Island Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee Robert L. Pryor discussed the lower court’s decision, at a symposium on the new bankruptcy laws.
The Circuit Court affirmed that decision and held that a trustee can only set aside a matrimonial settlement if he alleges and proves “extrinsic fraud.”  The Court also held that a divorce decree that follows from a regularly conducted, contested divorce proceeding conclusively establishes “reasonably equivalent value” in the absence of fraud or collusion.
Practice Tip #1:  Be wary that the bankruptcy court will always access the totality of the facts.  In a local case in the Central Islip Bankruptcy Court decided by Judge Dorothy Eisenberg last year, Long Island bankruptcy trustee Marc A. Pergament brought suit to set aside a transfer of real estate made pursuant to a divorce.  Pergament v. Cersosimo, (2008).  Judge Eisenberg dismissed the trustee’s suit, stating:
“A review of case law has shown that it is the rare bankruptcy court that will intrude on a state court divorce judgment and declare a transfer made therein to be a fraudulent conveyance.  However, rare does not mean never. If the court, upon review of the conveyance, determines that it was done to defraud creditors or was done for little to no consideration, then the court may make a finding that the transfer was a fraudulent conveyance.”
Practice Tip #2:  There is no guarantee that New York bankruptcy courts will follow the Bledsoe Ninth Circuit case.  However, considering that our Second Circuit is fairly liberal and desirous of protecting innocent spouses, it is highly likely that any New York bankruptcy court reviewing this issue will give the Bledsoe decision a great deal of weight.
 Practice Tip #3:  In order for a divorce settlement to be upheld by the bankruptcy court, it must be ratified in some way by the matrimonial court.  That means that any transfer should be accurately described in a stipulation of settlement.  In addition, the stipulation must be specifically referred to and adopted by the divorce decree.  It is not enough that the parties merely stipulate to a settlement; the court must specifically approve the settlement.  This can be accomplished by using the typical language in the divorce decree, that the stipulation survives the divorce decree and is not merged into it.


About the Author.  Long Island Bankruptcy Attorney Craig D. Robins, Esq., is a regular columnist for the Suffolk Lawyer, the official publication of the Suffolk County Bar Association in New York. This article appeared in the September 2009 issue of the Suffolk Lawyer. Mr. Robins is a bankruptcy lawyer who has represented thousands of consumer and business clients during the past twenty years. He has offices in Patchogue, Commack, Woodbury and Valley Stream. (516) 496-0800. For information about filing bankruptcy on Long Island, please visit his Bankruptcy web site: http://www.BankruptcyCanHelp.com.
Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Home Buying Advice Over Past Hundred Years Now Wrong

Posted on Monday (September 21, 2009) at 10:15 am to Benefits of Bankruptcy
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
Consumer Advice
Mortgages & Sub-Prime Mortgage Meltdown

Bankruptcy is the only way out for some homeowners who got in over their head with a new home purchaseWritten by Craig D. Robins, Esq.
Long Island first-time home buyers, hurt after following advice of so-called experts to stretch financially to buy their first house, are now getting out of bad situations with Chapter 7 bankruptcy
For ages, buyers of real estate were told that they should always stretch financially when buying their first home.  However, the recent resettling of the real estate market has blasted that maxim out of the water.  As a consequence of that good-natured, but ill-conceived advice, hundreds of thousands of Americans now have homes with no equity at all and are considering bankruptcy as a way out.
An article in the New York Times last week (Seven New Rules for the First-Time Home Buyer) said that too many people bought too much house for too many years.  Although our country’s financial system almost collapsed because of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown, the article suggested that consumers should share some of the responsibility.
Unfortunately, few home buyers anticipated such significant corrections with real estate values.  They also were blinded to the excited sales pitches of mortgage brokers and real estate sales agents about exotic mortgages that reset to rates that can become unaffordable.
A very large number of Long Island home buyers fell victims to this home buying euphoria and are now paying the price — something I see daily in my Long Island bankruptcy law practice.
Now, financial planners and economists are rejecting the idea that first-time home buyers should get as much home as they can afford.  The Times article spells out some new, common-sense guidelines that home buyers must consider, like placing a down payment of at least 20%, and not spending more than 35% of pre-tax income on the mortgage payment, including real estate tax and liability insurance.
The purchase of a home, once thought to be a no-brainer as far as being a safe investment, must now be approached cautiously.
For those home buyers that have found themselves in an untenable real estate situation, combined with excessive debt, bankruptcy can often provide a solution to getting out of a bad real estate home investment and getting a fresh new financial start.  We have helped many Long Island homeowners do just that with Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Mazda Automobiles of Great Neck Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection

Posted on Thursday (September 17, 2009) at 11:00 am to Chapter 11 Filings on Long Island

Long Island Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case InformationWritten by Craig D. Robins, Esq.

C.D. Autos, Inc., a Mazda car dealer, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy relief on August 27, 2009 in the Central Islip Bankruptcy Court under case number 8-09-76424. Judge Alan S. Trust is the assigned bankruptcy judge.

The debtor is a Nassau County car dealer who does business as Mazda Automobiles of Great Neck at a facility located at 240 Northern Blvd., Great Neck, New York.

The company, which is located in Great Neck, is being represented by Nassau County bankruptcy attorney Kenneth A. Reynolds of McBreen & Kopko. No disclosure of Compensation was filed. Most of the schedules, which were required to be filed by September 8, 2009, were not filed in a timely fashion.

The Debtor’s bankruptcy filing was necessitated by the fact that the New York State Department of Taxation had padlocked the Debtor’s car dealership thereby depriving the Debtor of its ability to operate its business, which failure to operate constitutes a breach under Debtor’s Mazda franchise agreement.

The Meeting of creditors will be held on October 2, 2009 at the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York in Central Islip (Room 563 at 9:00 a.m.). An emergency motion for use of cash collateral was held before Judge Trust on August 28, 2009, and adjourned to September 9, 2009.

This post is one of a series of posts available on the Long Island Bankruptcy Blog detailing every Chapter 11 bankruptcy case filed in the Central Islip Bankruptcy Court since August 1, 2009.  I will typically post a summary of each Chapter 11 case several days or weeks after it is filed as not all info is available immediately upon filing.  To see a list of Chapter 11 cases profiled on this blog, click Chapter 11 Filings on Long Island or type the name of the debtor in the upper right search box.

Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

Recession, Depression and Getting a New Start with Bankruptcy

Posted on Wednesday (September 16, 2009) at 12:30 pm to Bankruptcy and Society
Benefits of Bankruptcy
Consumer Advice

Recession can lead to depression, but filing bankruptcy can provide a fresh new financial startWritten by Craig D. Robins, Esq.
Substantial Earners Are Coping with Recessionary Layoffs by Filing for Bankruptcy
There have been some massive job layoffs in this deep recession, even for professionals and upper level executives.  Consequently, many recently-laid off workers are being forced to rethink their professional identities, their personal relationships and how they will manage their existing debt.
The current financially-plagued economy seems to be sparing no one.  Even white-collar workers with advanced degrees, working at prestigious companies, are not immune.  Anyone can lose a job.  Wall Street firms have not been kind; advertising and retail are suffering greatly, and many question the viability of garment industry jobs remaining in New York.
According to studies by organizational psychologists, white-collar men tend to experience unemployment differently.  For them it is sometimes difficult to adapt and find a job to provide income if that income is significantly less.  Grappling with joblessness inevitably entails surrendering an idea of who they are.  Negative emotions abound.  I’ve previously written about the Eight Steps to Cope with Emotional Issues During Bankruptcy  as well as The Emotional Side of Debt and Bankruptcy .
To those who qualify, bankruptcy can often provide a solution for eliminating substantial debt.  This usually has a very positive effect on the psyche, eliminating a large source of anxiety and depression.
The bankruptcy option should be discussed and considered well before the raiding of 401-K and other retirement accounts.  (See Are Pensions Protected in New York Bankruptcy Cases? ).
In my Long Island bankruptcy law practice, I frequently see clients who previously earned six-figure incomes.  Bankruptcy can provide an opportunity for a fresh new financial start and remove some of the pressure of finding new employment.
Print This Post Print This Post
Be Sociable, Share!

About Us

Craig D. Robins, Esq. is a Long Island bankruptcy lawyer, who is focused primarily on helping individuals and families, find solutions to their debt problems. Read more »


Subsribe via RSS Feed Reader

Contact Us

Craig D. Robins, Esq.
35 Pinelawn Road, Suite 218E, Melville, NY 11747.

Tel : 516 - 496 - 0800