Get in touch
SOUTH JERSEY
PHILADELPHIA
FLORIDA

5 Things to Avoid Before Filing Bankruptcy

David Haislip • Apr 21, 2021

Written by New Jersey Bankruptcy Lawyer, Lee M. Perlman.

I am sometimes asked by clients if there’s anything they should avoid doing before they file bankruptcy. More frequently, I learn during the first or second client meeting that one (or more!) of those things have already been done.  If you’re even thinking about taking the plunge into a bankruptcy, there are several things you should avoid.  So without further adieu, here are a few of the things NOT to do before you file a bankruptcy: 

           

1. Transferring money or property to family or friends 


A lot of people think that if they file a bankruptcy, they will have to surrender all of their assets – money, real estate, cars, etc.  Based on that (incorrect) assumption, it seems logical that transferring or giving away your property or valuables before you file bankruptcy would put you in a better position and allow you to keep your stuff.  However, both of these things are false.  First, when you file for bankruptcy, you do not have to surrender everything you own; in fact, the bankruptcy laws are specifically designed to protect and let you keep your stuff (up to certain limits).  Second, giving away your assets is a big fat no-no, and could even be considered bankruptcy fraud. 


Curious about what exactly it means to “transfer property?”  Here are some examples of what to avoid: 

  • Removing your name from a joint financial account (and leaving the account in the name of someone who is not filing bankruptcy)
  • Removing yourself from title to a car
  • Removing your name from a business venture 
  • Deeding real estate to someone else
  • Depositing or moving funds into a bank account that belongs to someone else



2. Raiding your 401K or pension before filing for bankruptcy


For many people, bankruptcy is a last resort that they try to avoid by getting money to pay their bills from any available source.  Oftentimes this leads them to borrowing from a 401k or pension.  Unfortunately, this usually doesn’t work long term, and in the end a bankruptcy has to be filed despite this well meant attempt.  What people don’t realize is that many retirement plans, like 401ks and employer structured pensions, are protected from creditors when a bankruptcy is filed. So when I hear that clients have needlessly used or depleted retirement savings in a futile attempt to avoid bankruptcy, I am always so disappointed that I did not have the chance to tell them what not to do before they came to talk to me!


3. Lying about your assets or income


When you file for bankruptcy, you have a duty to be truthful in your petition (i.e., the papers that you file with the court).  This includes accurately disclosing both what you own, and your level of income. If you fail to include everything you own, or attempt to lie about your income, your case could be dismissed – and if your case gets dismissed, you won't receive a bankruptcy discharge – and it’s the discharge that gives you the fresh start you were hoping for when you decided to file for bankruptcy in the first place.  Even worse, hiding your assets or income could lead to a criminal case being brought against you, complete with U.S. Department of Justice and FBI investigations.  The takeaway? Lying about assets is another giant no-no.

   

4. Running up your credit cards 


For most people, the ultimate goal in a bankruptcy case is to receive a discharge of their debts.  The discharge is the thing that officially gets rid of your debt and allows you to get the fresh start you were hoping for.  But your creditors can object to you getting a discharge.  You heard that right - that department store, Visa card issuer, dentist - they can all object to your discharge in certain circumstances.  And running up your debt right before you file is one of those circumstances.


Using your credit cards for necessities like gas, food, housing or medicine prior to filing is usually permitted. But when you charge things that are considered luxuries and not necessary to your maintenance and support, you should be prepared for an objection by the creditor.  If the creditor is successful with the objection, the debt that you owe to that creditor will not be discharged, and you will still owe that money even after you receive a discharge for your other debts. 


5. Favoring one creditor over another


What does it mean to favor a creditor and how can this hurt your case?  When you favor a creditor it means you decide to pay one creditor only, and don’t pay the others.  And anyone that you owe money to is considered a creditor – you may not think of the parent that lent you money as a creditor, but the bankruptcy code does.  Your mom may not be a big financial institution, and your Visa card issuer may not make you chicken soup when you’re sick, but in the context of your bankruptcy case, your mom and your Visa card share equal status as creditors. 


Paying creditors as you ordinarily do is ok, but paying one creditor only, especially a family member or friend, is not allowed, and the court can order the creditor (even your mom) to return the money so that it can be distributed to all the creditors. 


The five things listed above are my top five things to avoid before filing for bankruptcy – mostly because they’re the most common mistakes I see people make, and because they’re easy to avoid as long as you know about them.  There may be other things to avoid (or things you should specifically not avoid) based on the circumstances of your particular case.  You should talk to a
bankruptcy attorney if you’re even thinking about filing for bankruptcy – before you’re ready to file – to see what you should and shouldn’t do now, to avoid problems in your case later.

More News & Resources

By Joseph D. Lento 03 May, 2024
Nurses facing abuse or other misconduct charges over inappropriate patient restraint need skilled defense representation.
By Lawrence A. Katz 26 Apr, 2024
The news has recently had almost daily stories about the social media app, Tik Tok, and Congress’ threat to make using it illegal unless its ownership is transferred from its present Chinese owners. The argument for requiring the removal of Chinses owners is that they require access to personal and confidential information and that poses a national security risk. I have seen tech experts who question whether transferring ownership will actually eliminate that threat. They suggest that if the computer code for the Tik Top app already contains a “backdoor” enabling the secret access to information, changing ownership will not correct the problem. This blog is not intended to discuss those issues. Instead, we will address the claims by many that preventing people from using Tik Tok is a First Amendment free speech violation. I suggest that it is not. This is a tidbit to keep for your next Trivia Night. The First Amendment was originally only intended to prohibit the federal government from interfering with free speech. It was not until 1925, in Gitlow v. New York, that the United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibited all levels of government (states and local governments) from interfering with free speech. A government can limit speech if doing so is content neutral. As the United States Supreme Court has explained, “A regulation of speech is facially content based under the First Amendment if it ‘target[s] speech based on its communicative content’—that is, if it ‘applies to particular speech because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed.’” City of Austin v. Reagan Nat'l Advert. of Austin, LLC, 596 U.S. 61 (2022). Thus, where a transit system prohibited all advertisements on its premises, the Court held that the limit was constitutional because it applied to all subjects and opinions. In contrast, a limitation on a single message is not permitted. In Ctr. for Investigative Reporting v. SEPTA, 975 F.3d 300, 303 (3d Cir. 2020), a Court of Appeals ruled against a public transit agency’s refusal to accept advertisements that were political or discussed matters of public debate. The regulation was not content neutral. The prohibition against Tik Tok would likely be found constitutional because the prohibition is not based on a specific subject or viewpoint. There is one other issue that must be raised --- it is highly unlikely that a government could prohibit all means of public forums for speech. Even if content neutral, it is unlikely that a government could prohibit all social media any more than it could prohibit all newspapers. However, in the case of Tik Tok, prohibiting it from operating in the United States does not effectively prohibit all means of public forums as several other social media platforms still exist. Thus, the often-voiced opinion that eliminating Tik Tok denies its users their First Amendment rights is inaccurate.
By Joseph Cannizzo Jr 26 Apr, 2024
While dogs are often referred to as “man’s best friend,” dogs can also be dangerous, and even the friendliest of dogs may bite when provoked. This this blog post we will discuss some general legal theory about animal bites, including dog bites, and outline what you should do if you were bit by another person’s dog or other animal. Can I Sue for a Dog Bite? Before I answer this question, it is important to understand the legal theory that undergirds animal bite cases. The law classically categorized animals into two categories: domitae naturae – meaning, those animals that are classically domesticated or tamed – and ferae naturae – meaning, those animals that are classically feral, wild, or exotic. This distinction is significant legally because, generally speaking, those who possess a ferae naturae animal – for example, a tiger – do so at their own peril. This is because if ferae naturae animal bites another person, the owner of the animal is generally presumed to be at-fault. While the owner of a domitae naturae animal can also be held liable for the actions of that animal, generally, a bite by such an animal – for example, a cat or a dog – may not necessarily give rise to a presumption of fault. At least, that was the classical framework. This has been changed by individual laws in many states. Most states have adopted a strict-liability standard in connection with dog bites. This means that a biting dog’s owner will be held liable for injuries caused by the dog, even if the owner used reasonable care to restrain the dog or to protect or warn the other party. Often, this strict-liability view can be viewed as harsh, if one adheres to the “accidents happen” mentality. In recognition of the potentially harsh outcomes strict-liability may bring about, a handful of other states have adopted a “One-Bite Rule”. In essence, a One-Bite Rule is a law that provides that a dog owner may only be held liable if they knew or should have known that the dog has a vicious propensity or is prone to bite, and that owner would only have such knowledge if the dog has bitten someone in the past. In other words, the One-Bite Rule is called this because the owner of a dog with a propensity to bite essentially gets their first bite free because the owner will likely not be found liable for the first bite. This is consistent with the notion of the “foreseeability of the harm” that undergirds much of tort law – in other words, how could the owner foresee that his or her dog would bite if it has never done so before? Conversely, the owner should know, and should therefore be held liable, if the dog has bitten someone before. So, to answer the question of whether you can sue if you have been bitten by a dog, the answer, generally is yes, but the merits of you claim will depend largely on whether you live in a strict-liability state or a One-Bite Rule state. What Do I Do If I Have Been Bitten? While you may, of course, be panicked immediately following a dog bite, it is important to do the following: · Call 911 to report the incident. Make sure a police report is filed, and get a copy of it. · Get the dog owner’s name and contact information, if possible. · Try to get a picture of the dog and the owner, if possible. · Take pictures of the bite wounds while they are still fresh. · Go seek medical treatment, if necessary, and try to leave the appointment with a copy of your medical record in connection with the visit. · Contact a knowledgeable personal injury lawyer as soon as possible. If you or a loved one have been injured by a public actor or public entity, call the Lento Law Group today. Our team of knowledgeable and compassionate attorneys and support staff can help guide you while you work to pick up the pieces after a traumatic accident. Call Lento Law Group today at (856) 652-2000. We will fight to get you the recovery you deserve.
By Joseph Cannizzo Jr. 26 Apr, 2024
By Joseph Cannizzo Jr. July 2023
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff 26 Apr, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff, Esquire • 20 April, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff 26 Apr, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff, Esquire • 06 April, 2024
08 Mar, 2024
By Jeanilou G.T. Maschhoff, Esquire • 06 March, 2024
08 Mar, 2024
By Lawrence A. Katz, Esquire • 07 Feb, 2024
08 Mar, 2024
Professional discipline in one state can affect a professional license in another state. Don’t run. Get help up front.
01 Mar, 2024
ERIC HAKEEM DEONTAYE MAYS, late Councilman Eric Mays's son and only next of kin, along with Bishop Patrick Munnerlyn, Community Outreach Specialist for the Lento Law Group, cordially invites the Flint community to a candlelight vigil to honor the remarkable life and legacy of Councilman Eric B. Mays. The vigil will take place on Saturday, March 2, at 6:00 PM in front of Flint City Hall, as we come together to celebrate a true hero of Flint, a relentless champion for the community, a visionary leader, a devoted public servant, and a cherished friend. Councilman Mays was a beacon of hope and strength for Flint, advocating tirelessly for the rights and well-being of its residents. His unwavering dedication to serving the community has left an indelible mark on the hearts of all who had the privilege of knowing him. As we gather to remember his remarkable contributions, let us light candles in unity to illuminate the path he paved toward a brighter future for Flint. This vigil is an opportunity for us to reflect on the profound impact of Councilman Mays’ work, to share stories of his courage and kindness, and to reaffirm our commitment to the values he embodied. Participants are welcome to bring their own candles, but candles will also be provided (as long as supplies last) to ensure that everyone can join in this act of remembrance and solidarity. Councilman Mays’ love for the people of Flint was boundless, and in return, he was deeply loved and respected by the community he served. As we mourn his passing, we also celebrate the legacy of a man who dedicated his life to making Flint a better place for all its residents. It has indeed been a sad week in Flint, but let us come together to honor a man who gave so much of himself to our city. Join us in front of Flint City Hall to pay tribute to Councilman Eric B. Mays, a man who deserves the best: our collective love, respect, and admiration. We invite everyone to come and show their support by standing in solidarity as we remember a great man who has left an everlasting mark on our community. Atlanta, GA • Birmingham, AL • Boulder, CO • Coral Springs, FL • Detroit, MI • El Paso, TX • Flint, MI • Honolulu, HI • Los Angeles, CA • Maui, HI Miami, FL • Mount Laurel, NJ • Newark, NJ • New York, NY • Orlando, FL • Philadelphia, PA • Puerta Plata, DR •Richmond, VA • Salt Lake City, UT San Juan, PR • Scottsdale, AZ • Washington, DC 
More Posts
Share by: