Chapter 7 reaffirmation went wrong! Please help.

What is the name of your state? Illinois

I filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy this past March and the court case close as of August of this year.

During this time I was to reaffirm the car with NMAC (Nissan) and it was in the paperwork.

Well, I contacted Nissan just two weeks ago because I was having a problem making a payment into the automated system.
I found out for the customer representative that they are sending out a statement for permission to resume billing ONLY as a reminder and nothing more as it was prior to the bankruptcy and
to continue making voluntary payments as it was prior to the bankruptcy.

This was all confusing so I asked them is the account reaffirmed or not? She said NO it isn't and it has been discharged. That completely shocked me as this wasn't supposed to happen at all. So therefore, I asked why and they claim that the Attorney never sent back the new contract and reaffirmation agreement.

Obviously, I contacted my Attorney and they said they received no such paperwork and ask them to prove it. So I did. Nissan's response was we are not required to prove anything we sent the paperwork and she laughed at me on the phone.

Well I contacted the attorney's office back and she told me after looking at the paperwork they sent to me it does not mention anything other than to resume billing as a reminder and recommended not to agree to it as it is too vague in wording. I was informed that basically I could make payments and they will gladly take that money but since there is no agreement they can take that car at any time, any day without an agreement since it was discharged account now.

So, this angered me completely since I invested 2 1/2 years of car payment torward the car. And on top of it I was scared of this new information and followed the attorney's office advice and had to purchase another car. I was very lucky I got on but at a nasty 21%.

I feel that this is totally wrong and that I have been victimized.
If this had not happened than why should I suffer to pay for nothing as I have for 6 months of carpayment not knowing this even happened. In addition, to now have to buy another car at a ridiculous rate and a bank told me since I have a discharged account they will and most will not give you refinancing for 2 years!

So, I feel cheated on this and deceited and I had every intention of paying for it under reaffirmation. Why would anyone pay without a agreement is beyond me???

So here's the questions:

1) I currently still have that Nissan and did not sign nor will I let them resume anything without agreement. So what happens here?

2) I still have that car and feel that this has not only damaged my credit with getting it refinanced due to NMAC discharge but now I got a ridiculous rate as a result and had to get another car. Is there anything out there that prevents or can help a debtor in the event a creditor does something such as dishonest and cunning as this? It's very apparant to me there intent was to continue to collect as they have without a contract or agreement and just take it when I stop paying or figure this out.

Shouldn't a debtor be entitled to such damages as a result of this negligence on a creditor's part and lying about it (paperwork)?

I can prove it.

3) The car has been moved into a very secure place until legal retainment can be obtained. So, now I feel they cheated me and took half of my cash I already paid torward that car and cost me a nasty problem as a result. If I get sued do I have the right or a leg to stand on to file a countersuit for damages as a result of this conspiracy to take my money willingly without an agreement and behind my back without anyone informing this occurred?

I really need some help here. This is like stealing money from a bank and if this is allowed in bankruptcy laws than it's quite flawed if you ask me. A creditor should have every right to take it back but not do what they just did and lie and take my money after an offer of reaffirmation occurred and then lie saying they sent paperwork to the attorney whom asked for them to prove it. Obviously they can't.

Thanks for the HELP!@#$

[bigun]

Good Lord! First of all, the creditor is under no obligation to reafffirm a debt. Secondly, it's up to the trustee and bk judge to approve a reaffirmation agreement and many refuse.
You really went off half ****ed on this one. Barely out of bk and refusing to make a car payment is far more damaging than a reaffirmation foulup. If you don't start paying Nissan, they'll repo their property.

Thanks for the reply. Let's get this straight now really missed the bulls eye here.

The issue is that there is no new contract and nor am I obligated to pay for the car if it's discharged. End of story.
Since MOST car companies do NOT want a car back (got a friend working in collections at Porsche) they may attempt a negotiation first since they knowlingly can do NOTHING at this point to me. Which explains the nice letters. But heh, why do this when you didn't reaffirm in the first place? I attempted and they said the paperwork wasn't returned. An apparant lie to get this car back that's half paid off so it could be resold and they make double and at my expense.

They will and can repo but can they sue if I hold the car if I seek damages or attempt to renogitiate this? Too my knowledge they cannot sue a debtor, resume billing, or contact once an account is discharged.

In a nut shell, how can it be possibly worse than a bankrupt discharged account ?????? A discharged account is a discharged account. It makes no difference what you pay you don't get any credit for that!!! NO one should ever pay on something you get nothing back for or without a contract. Right? C'mon now don't ever trust a creditor in good faith. That's silly.

The system is flawed to allow this. It's designed for the creditor to obtain items back even if they are half or mostly paid for.
Obviously they will opt to decline the reaffirmation in a scenario like that. Technically the car is paid for if you include the interest. If what has happened is true with others than the case of the law is flawed hold quite true.

Buyer and bakrupters beware. A bankruptcy in the end favors the creditor again. This is why before you bankrupt automatically expect to lose that car unless it's in the creditor favor financially!

[bigun]

They sure can sue you to recover their property. And, when they win you have a brand new judgment on top of a recent bk. Either start making your car payment on time or, surrender the car.

Buyer and bakrupters beware. A bankruptcy in the end favors the creditor again. This is why before you bankrupt automatically expect to lose that car unless it's in the creditor favor financially!


This statement just isn't true. They would have allowed you to make payments on the car. They don't want to have to sell a 2 year old car at auction at a fraction of it's value. You made the mistake by not understanding that in a bk, both creditors and debtors have rights and the creditor does not have to reaffirm anything. You're the one who jumped to some wild conclusions about fairness and went out and fianced another car at 21% when you would have been allowed to keep this one.

[nailtech]

Terck, you can look at this two ways ok…. First of all you now own a vehicle that was ‘not included’ in the Bk which after two years you can refinance and you’re already starting to cleaning your credit now… and then you can look at it as one of those credit cards at 21% you’re not paying any longer and spending it on a car…. Give the Nissan back to them and be done with it. Consider it as rent, (the money you paid them already)… and forgive me for saying it but, you just dumped credit card debt but you’re griping about getting ripped off?? Quit feeling as though you just got ripped off and feel for the one’s who just did… JMO…


And I am a former BK filer, so I’m not on a high horse or anything like that, just wanting you to see your glass is half full and not half empty…

and I can NOT finance a car now because my cars were included in my BK(there harder to trade in, so i'm told)... so consider yourself lucky you have one that's not 'included'... JMO/insite...

Buyer and bakrupters beware. A bankruptcy in the end favors the creditor again. This is why before you bankrupt automatically expect to lose that car unless it's in the creditor favor financially!

YOU SAY:
"This statement just isn't true."

Really?
And since when does a creditor LOVE to give you low APR because your a good person? And why would they wan't to work out when you add the interest plus payments when it pays the car off?????????????????????
Geez...it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this one out!
Of course they will wan't it if it's already paid for technically and they can make more. Is that not taking advantage?

They would have allowed you to make payments on the car.

Then after speaking with them why didn't they? There reason was the court system didn't like the wording of their reaffirmation agreement!@#!@ And guess what? They told me that!
Since when does a creditor make up bankruptcy laws?

They don't want to have to sell a 2 year old car at auction at a fraction of it's value.

If it's half paid for with interest than is it not true they already got there money? So why not if you can get more ?

You made the mistake by not understanding that in a bk, both creditors and debtors have rights and the creditor does not have to reaffirm anything. You made the mistake by not understanding that in a bk, both creditors and debtors have rights and the creditor does not have to reaffirm anything. You're the one who jumped to some wild conclusions about fairness and went out and fianced another car at 21% when you would have been allowed to keep this one.

"Did you read anything that was stated? It's NOT a matter of whether or not they have the right, SO DO YOU. And they did try but they said they expected the attorney to do the paperwork and the court system didn't like Nissan's wording. So since when does a creditor get to make up laws???? And since when do you get to keep a car WITHOUT a new agreement after a bankruptcy??? Your still allowed to keep it???? Well that's up to the creditor. They are the one holding the title. You could give them the balance and it's still up to them. They can get it any time they want after a discharge and they could take it whenever they want and you don't credit for it!"
So you do this on good faith? Yeah right and you can expect them too also.

The only thing half ****ed is some information being read here. If it's discharged due to a mistake you are better off letting it go. You get no credit for it, risk losing it anyway and lose the money you put into it. And my attorney told me this and said get another car the account was discharged.

I asked for help and you turned into an argument. Go to another thread please. The question was whether or not after the court was closed whether or not I would get in trouble for retaining the car when they basically decided to make up bankruptcy law themselves. That's the real issue.

[Ladynred]

Terck - you're not getting this at all.

It is NOT REQUIRED that you have a reaffirmation agreement to keep a car after bankruptcy ! You do NOT have to have that 'new contract' as you are wrongly assuming !!! It happens EVERY DAY that people do NOT reaffirm on cars, but as long as the KEEP MAKING PAYMENTS the lender will NOT REPO that vehicle !! They don't want the damn car, they want they money, and that's it !!

Its true that they cannot bill you or do anything to actively collect on a discharged debt. That is why it is imperitive that YOU find out exactly where payments are to be sent after bankruptcy and WHEN they are expected. Then you have to make the payments on time. If you miss a payment, even by a day, they CAN repo the car. THAT is more likley what the laughing Nissan rep meant, NOT that they could repo it anytime even if you're paying.

Get over it, you screwed yourself with your misunderstanding and jumping the gun. REAFFIRMATIONS are NOT required and banks WILL let you keep the car, even if the debt is discharged, as long as you are making the payments. You have failed to do so and you are NOT going to be able to keep the vehicle. Either you took it upon yourself to get another vehicle, or you received some bad advice. Sounds to me if you could afford to keep making the original payments on the Nissan, you didn't need to go get another car at some horrendous rate !

No one will EVER tell you that you'll get a 'nice' rate on ANYTHING post-bankruptcy. Its a given that rates for any financing, if you can get it, will be horrible. By filing for bankruptcy, you're accepting the fact that your credit is going to be in the toilet for a while and you MUST rebuild it - carefully. You're off to a bad start by assuming you're being persecuted, which is a far cry from the truth.

Either pay for the Nissan and keep it, or give it back. If you can pay up on the Nissan, do so, then I'd dump the 21% monkey on your back ASAP, but quit crying about your misunderstandings !

You've answered a couple of questions for me before regarding filing Chapter 7 and reaffirming my car loan. I was hoping to keep it out of the bk proceedings as it co-signed by my roommate. The payments have ALWAYS been paid on time, because it's directly taking out of my paycheck before I get it! I believe you said I didn't have to re-affirm if the payments were up to date, but my lawyer insist on reaffermation( I live in Florida). Do I have to reaffirm and is it my choice??

[Ladynred]

I believe I also posted some info on FL reaffirmations - and they are VOLUNTARY. The bottom line here is that you can only ASK for a reaffirmation, in the end the COURT decides whether or not its in your best interests to ALLOW a reaff to go thru.

I would ask your lawyer just why he/she is so insistent on a reaffirmation in the first place. From what I could find for FL they are not REQUIRED. It could be your lawyer is concerned about the co-signer. However, it the payments are made, your co-signer should be unaffected. If YOUR BK shows up on the co-signer's credit report, then the co-signer has grounds for a complaint against the credit bureaus to have it removed.

florida is in one of the circuit's that requires reaff, surrender, or redeem per section 512(2)(a). there is NO lawful fourth option (ride through).

i see folks on this board routinely telling folks not to reaff and just keep paying (ride through), that just doesn't work in some circuits. the circuits are split on this issue, so ride throughs AREN'T the law in all circuits.