In re Breit

490 B.R. 821, 2013 WL 1810745, 2013 Bankr. LEXIS 1759
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana
DecidedMarch 27, 2013
DocketNo. 11-32461 HCD
StatusPublished

This text of 490 B.R. 821 (In re Breit) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Breit, 490 B.R. 821, 2013 WL 1810745, 2013 Bankr. LEXIS 1759 (Ind. 2013).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

HARRY C. DEES, JR., Bankruptcy Judge.

Before the court are the Trustee’s Objection to Claim Number 6-1, filed by Debra L. Miller, Standing Chapter 13 Trustee (“Trustee”), and the Response to that objection by JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association (“Chase”), the service provider for the debtors’ mortgage on their residence. The objection focuses on the amount of Chase’s pre-petition arrear-age claim. After a hearing, the parties filed stipulated facts and briefs on the matter. For the reasons that follow, the court sustains the Trustee’s Objection to Claim No. 6-1.1

BACKGROUND

The debtors herein, intending to preserve their home, filed a chapter 13 bankruptcy petition. They scheduled Chase as a creditor holding a secured claim in their residence. Chase filed Proof of Claim No. 6-1. It claimed a secured claim of $126,428.06 and an arrearage claim of $27,897.09. The Trustee objects to the [823]*823claim on the ground that the arrearage amount is overstated by $3,379.35. The Trustee asserts that the total pre-petition arrearage should be adjusted to be $24,517.74.

The parties have stipulated to the following facts concerning this chapter 13 case:

1. This case was filed on June 20, 2011. Pursuant to the confirmed Plan, the cure amount and the continuing post-petition mortgage payments are to be paid through the Trustee conduit.
2. On March 1, 2012, [Chase] filed Court Claim No. 6-1 in the amount of $126,428.06.
3. Pursuant to the attachments to Court Claim No. 6-1, the claim shows a total pre-petition arrearage of $27,897.09.
4. The pre-petition arrearage attachment (B 10 Attachment A) filed on March 1, 2012 indicates the following amounts are used to calculate the pre-petition arrearage:
a. $1,436.37 in pre-petition fees; and
b. 24 monthly installment payments of $1,102.53.
5. The principal and interest payment was $804.79 during the 24 months prior to the filing of the bankruptcy.
6. On the date the bankruptcy was filed, the escrow balance for the mortgage was $-2,909.37.
7. On the date of bankruptcy, the target balance2 with [the] cushion for the mortgage escrow account, [required by the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) ], was $857.04.3

R. 62.

The Trustee points out that, in a chapter 13 case, the pre-petition arrearage generally is the amount due to a creditor to cure the debtors’ deficiency on their mortgage. The arrearage is the sum of:

(1) the amount of taxes and insurance advanced by the creditor and unpaid by the debtor pre-petition;
(2) the amount of unpaid principal and interest due as of the petition date;
(3) the amount of unpaid fees, costs, and attorney fees allowable under the mortgage documents as of the petition date; and
(4) the amount that should have been in the escrow account to properly fund the ongoing taxes and insurance as required under applicable non-bankruptcy law.

R. 66 at 1. The Trustee argues that the pre-petition arrearage amount listed on the creditor’s Proof of Claim is overstated and was not calculated in this manner.

[824]*824The Trustee and Chase agree on these principles and calculations in this case:

(a) The pre-petition arrearages should be paid over 24 months in monthly installments.
(b) The pre-petition installment payments should include unpaid principal and interest payments.
(e) In this case, the debtors’ monthly payment for principal and interest was $804.79.
(d) The delinquent $804.79 payment, multiplied by 24 months = $19,314.96 prineipal/interest.
(e) The delinquent fees and costs should be added. In this case, the sum is $1,436.37.
(f) The target balance, or escrow shortage, should be added. In this case, it is $857.04.

According to the Trustee, when these ar-rearages are added, the total amount of the pre-petition arrearage is $24,517.74, not Chase’s sum of $27,897.09.

The disagreement between the Trustee and Chase involves the additional amount Chase adds to the arrearage calculation: Chase includes an “escrow deficiency.” According to Chase, the pre-petition installment payments include both principal and interest payments, $804.79, and the escrow deficiency, $297.74, multiplied by 24 months. The total escrow deficiency charged by Chase, for 24 months of payments, is $7,145.76. The Trustee asserts that the only payments Chase made on behalf of the debtors from escrow were for pre-petition taxes and insurance, and those payments totaled $2,909.37. She argues that only $2,909.37, and not $7,145.76, should be included as a pre-petition escrow arrearage.

DISCUSSION

When a proof of claim is filed under 11 U.S.C. § 501, the claim is deemed allowed and presumed to be valid unless a party in interest objects. 11 U.S.C. § 502(a). However, when an objection is raised, the validity and/or amount of the claim is contested and the objector, in this case the Trustee, must provide evidence supporting the objection and refuting the claim. See In re VanCleef, 479 B.R. 809, 821 (Bank.N.D.Ind.2012). If the objector meets her burden of production, the burden then shifts to the claimant to prove the validity and/or amount of the claim. See id.; see also In re Wells, 463 B.R. 320, 326 (Bank.E.D.Pa.2011) (stating that “the ultimate burden of persuasion is always on the claimant”) (citation omitted).

The court finds that the Trustee has presented sufficient evidence to challenge the amount of Chase’s reported pre-petition escrow arrearage. She acknowledges that Chase paid $2,909.37 from the debtors’ escrow account for taxes and insurance, but claims that Chase’s “escrow component” of $297.74 included in each installment payment, which over 24 months totaled $7,145.76, overstated the arrear-age.

Chase, in response, first points out that its Claim No. 6-1 fully complies with all the filing requirements of Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3001, as amended effective December 1, 2011. The court agrees that the Trustee has not alleged that Chase’s Proof of Claim fails to comply with procedural requirements. Nor is there any challenge to Chase’s general right to a pre-petition escrow deficiency. Lenders have an enforceable right to collect the past-due escrow payments by means of a pre-petition claim. See, e.g., In re Rodriguez, 629 F.3d 136, 142 (3d Cir.2010), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 573, 181 L.Ed.2d 420 (2011); Camp[825]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Campbell v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
545 F.3d 348 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)
In Re Rodriguez
629 F.3d 136 (Third Circuit, 2010)
In Re Stewart
391 B.R. 327 (E.D. Louisiana, 2008)
Williams v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
504 F. Supp. 2d 176 (S.D. Texas, 2007)
In Re Beaudet
455 B.R. 671 (M.D. Tennessee, 2011)
In Re Wells
463 B.R. 320 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2011)
In re Vancleef
479 B.R. 809 (N.D. Indiana, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
490 B.R. 821, 2013 WL 1810745, 2013 Bankr. LEXIS 1759, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-breit-innb-2013.