比較破產程式中清償債權 喪失抵押品贖回權和虧損出售的區別(一)
楊清泉律師事務所
很多客人不止一次問過我關於法律上破產程式中清償債權,喪失抵押品贖回權和虧損出售的區別。由此可見,這 3個概念經常被人混淆。現在讓我們先從定義上區別每個概念: 破產程式中清償債權指法庭頒令免除破產申請人的一切債務。喪失抵押品贖回權是一個法律過程,指當債務人無法還清貸款時, 經債權人同意, 債務人以抵押品抵押之前所欠貸款。虧損出售是指當房主欠的貸款遠比房屋的價值要多, 債權人願意接受物業出售。
一個客人在洛杉磯擁有市值約 25萬美元的一所房子。這棟房子有3處抵押貸款: 第一處為欠A銀行30萬元; 第二處為按揭欠B銀行5萬元; 第三處按揭欠私人朋友為 2萬元。根據破產法第七章規定,這個客人獲得了破產程式中清償債權。客戶因為失去了工作, 所以並不想保留房子。A銀行最終拿回了房產,因為客戶已經有一年沒有按揭支付房屋貸款了。在喪失抵押品贖回權拍賣中,奧巴馬以20萬元購買了該房產。那麼, A銀行是否可以起訴該客戶並且領取該客人所欠30萬和房子賣出價20萬之間的差額呢?答案是否定的, 原因有兩個.如果房子是位於加利福尼亞州, 那麼喪失抵押品贖回權是法外處理,但是在加利福尼亞州沒有喪失抵押品贖回權的漏洞。破產法庭下令免除破產申請人的一切債務。那麼B銀行是否可以起訴一直沒有償還5萬元貸款的客戶嗎?答案也是否定的, 理由是: 法院履行了這項清償債權的申請.這個客人的朋友是否可以起訴他尚未還清的2萬元呢?也不可以, 還是因為法院履行了這項清償債權的申請.另一個問題是: A銀行,B銀行和客人的朋友是否可以給客戶一個 1099從而使他以後的收入額抵銷這些無法收回的壞賬?不可以.第一個原因是清償債權不能原諒,因為已經宣告破產並且清償欠債。
COMPARE BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE /FORECLOSURE/SHORT SALE
Several clients have once again asked me questions that actually involve the distinction between the legal effects of a bankruptcy discharge, a foreclosure and a short sale. Consequently, there is confusion about these 3 concepts. Let’s start with defining each concept. A bankruptcy discharge is a court order from a bankruptcy court discharging or wiping out debt. A foreclosure is the legal process involved when a secured creditor takes the collateral back when debtor has defaulted on the loan. A short sale happens when a secured creditor agrees to accept an amount that is less than what is owed when the property is sold. To illustrate:
Client owns a house in Los Angeles with a fair market value of $250,000. There are 3 mortgages on this house. The first mortgage is owed to Bank A for $300,000. The second mortgage is owed to Bank B for $50,000. The third mortgage is owed to personal friend for $20,000. Client files for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and subsequently obtains a discharge from the court. Client decides that he does not want to keep the house because he lost his job. Bank A eventually takes the house back because client has not paid the mortgage for one year by foreclosing on the house. At the foreclosure auction, Obama buys the house for $200,000. Can Bank A sue client to collect the difference between $300,000, the amount owed to Bank A, and $200,000, the amount Obama paid for the house? No. There are 2 reasons. If the house was located in California and the foreclosure was extrajudicial, there is no foreclosure deficiency in California. The bankruptcy court ordered the debt discharged and wiped out. Can Bank B sue client to collect $50,000 which has not been paid? No. The reason is that the court discharged this debt. Can personal friend sue client to collect $20,000? No. The debt is discharged in bankruptcy. A further question is this: Can Bank A, Bank B or personal friend treats these debts as uncollectible bad debts and give client a 1099 thereby making these amounts income of client? No. The reason is a discharged debt cannot be forgiven because it was discharged in bankruptcy and there is nothing to forgive.
( to be continued )
一個客人在洛杉磯擁有市值約 25萬美元的一所房子。這棟房子有3處抵押貸款: 第一處為欠A銀行30萬元; 第二處為按揭欠B銀行5萬元; 第三處按揭欠私人朋友為 2萬元。根據破產法第七章規定,這個客人獲得了破產程式中清償債權。客戶因為失去了工作, 所以並不想保留房子。A銀行最終拿回了房產,因為客戶已經有一年沒有按揭支付房屋貸款了。在喪失抵押品贖回權拍賣中,奧巴馬以20萬元購買了該房產。那麼, A銀行是否可以起訴該客戶並且領取該客人所欠30萬和房子賣出價20萬之間的差額呢?答案是否定的, 原因有兩個.如果房子是位於加利福尼亞州, 那麼喪失抵押品贖回權是法外處理,但是在加利福尼亞州沒有喪失抵押品贖回權的漏洞。破產法庭下令免除破產申請人的一切債務。那麼B銀行是否可以起訴一直沒有償還5萬元貸款的客戶嗎?答案也是否定的, 理由是: 法院履行了這項清償債權的申請.這個客人的朋友是否可以起訴他尚未還清的2萬元呢?也不可以, 還是因為法院履行了這項清償債權的申請.另一個問題是: A銀行,B銀行和客人的朋友是否可以給客戶一個 1099從而使他以後的收入額抵銷這些無法收回的壞賬?不可以.第一個原因是清償債權不能原諒,因為已經宣告破產並且清償欠債。
COMPARE BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE /FORECLOSURE/SHORT SALE
Several clients have once again asked me questions that actually involve the distinction between the legal effects of a bankruptcy discharge, a foreclosure and a short sale. Consequently, there is confusion about these 3 concepts. Let’s start with defining each concept. A bankruptcy discharge is a court order from a bankruptcy court discharging or wiping out debt. A foreclosure is the legal process involved when a secured creditor takes the collateral back when debtor has defaulted on the loan. A short sale happens when a secured creditor agrees to accept an amount that is less than what is owed when the property is sold. To illustrate:
Client owns a house in Los Angeles with a fair market value of $250,000. There are 3 mortgages on this house. The first mortgage is owed to Bank A for $300,000. The second mortgage is owed to Bank B for $50,000. The third mortgage is owed to personal friend for $20,000. Client files for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and subsequently obtains a discharge from the court. Client decides that he does not want to keep the house because he lost his job. Bank A eventually takes the house back because client has not paid the mortgage for one year by foreclosing on the house. At the foreclosure auction, Obama buys the house for $200,000. Can Bank A sue client to collect the difference between $300,000, the amount owed to Bank A, and $200,000, the amount Obama paid for the house? No. There are 2 reasons. If the house was located in California and the foreclosure was extrajudicial, there is no foreclosure deficiency in California. The bankruptcy court ordered the debt discharged and wiped out. Can Bank B sue client to collect $50,000 which has not been paid? No. The reason is that the court discharged this debt. Can personal friend sue client to collect $20,000? No. The debt is discharged in bankruptcy. A further question is this: Can Bank A, Bank B or personal friend treats these debts as uncollectible bad debts and give client a 1099 thereby making these amounts income of client? No. The reason is a discharged debt cannot be forgiven because it was discharged in bankruptcy and there is nothing to forgive.
( to be continued )
把此文章分享到：
關於 楊清泉律師事務所
