It Appears to LIT that Banks, Servicers and Foreclosure Mill Lawyers Are Ignoring Consumer Protection Laws

The phrase “Order Granting Chapter 13 Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss Case” refers to a legal document or court order in the context of a Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding.

Let’s break down the key elements:

1. Chapter 13: This refers to a specific chapter of the United States Bankruptcy Code. Chapter 13 bankruptcy allows individuals with regular income to develop a plan to repay all or part of their debts over a period of time, usually three to five years.
2. Trustee: In a bankruptcy case, a trustee is a person appointed to oversee the case and ensure that creditors are treated fairly. In the context of Chapter 13, the trustee plays a role in administering the debtor’s repayment plan.
3. Motion to Dismiss Case: A motion is a formal request made to the court for a specific action. In this case, the trustee has filed a motion to dismiss the Chapter 13 case. Dismissing a case means bringing it to an end, typically before the debtor has completed the repayment plan.
4. Order Granting: This indicates that the court has reviewed the trustee’s motion and has decided to grant it. In other words, the court has approved the trustee’s request to dismiss the Chapter 13 case.

So, the overall meaning of the phrase is that the court has issued an order approving the Chapter 13 trustee’s request to dismiss the bankruptcy case. This could happen for various reasons, such as the debtor’s failure to comply with the repayment plan or other requirements of the bankruptcy process.

The debtor’s repayment plan in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case may not be approved for various reasons. Here are some common reasons why a repayment plan might be rejected or not approved by the bankruptcy court:

Failure to Meet Eligibility Requirements:

The debtor must meet certain eligibility criteria to qualify for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. If the debtor doesn’t meet these requirements, the court may not approve the repayment plan.

Inadequate Income:

Chapter 13 requires debtors to have a regular source of income to fund the repayment plan. If the court determines that the debtor’s income is insufficient to cover the proposed payments, the plan may be rejected.

Inability to Make Plan Payments:

The repayment plan must demonstrate that the debtor can make the proposed payments. If the debtor cannot realistically afford the payments outlined in the plan, the court may reject it.

Failure to Include All Required Debts:

The repayment plan must include all priority debts and secured debts, and it must propose to pay unsecured creditors at least as much as they would receive in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. If the plan does not meet these requirements, it may be rejected.

Incomplete or Inaccurate Information:

If the information provided in the repayment plan is incomplete or inaccurate, the court may reject it. The plan needs to provide a clear and accurate picture of the debtor’s financial situation.

Failure to Attend Required Meetings:

Debtors are generally required to attend meetings with creditors and the trustee during the bankruptcy process. Failure to attend these meetings may result in the rejection of the repayment plan.

Failure to Comply with Court Orders:

If the debtor fails to comply with court orders or fails to fulfill obligations outlined in the bankruptcy process, the court may reject the repayment plan.

It’s essential for debtors to work closely with their bankruptcy attorney to ensure that the repayment plan is accurately prepared, complies with legal requirements, and addresses the debtor’s financial situation effectively. If the plan is not approved, the debtor and their attorney may need to make adjustments and seek court approval again.

TYNAN, CLAY VILT AND THE END OF THE BK CASE

Mon 11/21/2022 9:36 PM

Howdy,

We note the bankruptcy case for James Tynan is set for dismissal. His home isn’t his home.

Have you read the update in the state court foreclosure case re Lindsey, represented by Vilt?

Attorney James Cuellar has filed for sanctions. He should be reporting Vilt to the Bar, it’s mandatory.

The question is, will you be reporting him too, based on the fact that this is a Foreclosure Scam Title Deed Fraud case, well reported on LIT.

Let us know what you plan on doin’ re Vilt when you seek relief from the BK stay.

Y’all have a great day.

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff James T. Tynan Jr. (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant, U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Trustee of American Homeowner Preservation Trust Series improperly named as U.S. Bank, N.A. (“Trustee” or “Defendant”) hereby file this Stipulation of Dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and would respectfully show unto the Court as follows:

1. Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against Defendant seeking to delay or prevent foreclosure by Trustee. Defendant appeared denying all claims.

Plaintiff wishes to dismiss all claims against Defendant without prejudice and the parties agree because Plaintiff recently filed for bankruptcy protection and therefore Defendant has withdrawn its objections to dismissal and consents to same.

2. In conformity with Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), this Stipulation is signed by all parties who have appeared in the action.

3. By this Stipulation, it is hereby stipulated all claims of Plaintiff against Defendant are dismissed without prejudice.

This Stipulation disposes of all claims and causes of action by all parties.

4. Plaintiff and Defendant further stipulate that all costs of court, attorney’s fees and other costs incurred are to be borne by the party incurring the same.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, all claims and causes of action brought by Plaintiff against Defendants are dismissed without prejudice.

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Robert C. Vilt
Robert C. Vilt
State Bar No. 00788586

Vilt and Associates, P.C.
5177 Richmond Avenue, Suite 1142
Houston, Texas 77056
Telephone: 713.840.7570
Facsimile: 713.77.1827
Email: clay@viltlaw.com

ATTORNEYS-IN-CHARGE FOR PLAINTIFF

By: /s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.

Michael F. Hord, Jr.
Texas Bar No. 00784294

Eric C. Mettenbrink
Texas Bar No. 24043819

Hirsch & Westheimer, P.C.
1415 Louisiana, 36th Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 220-9182 Telephone
(713) 223-9319
Facsimile mhord@hirschwest.com emettenbrink@hirschwest.com

ATTORNEY-IN-CHARGE FOR DEFENDANT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On this 7th day of September, 2022, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was forwarded as follows:

Robert C. Vilt
Vilt and Associates, P.C.
5177 Richmond Avenue, Suite 1142
Houston, TX 77056
Via ECF

/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.

U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:22-cv-01433