Keywords: 910 loans .
Secured Debt: 910 Car Loans > Miscellaneous Issues23 Cases , IssueID 60 |
||||||||
Ch 7 Means Test |
Ch 13 Means Test |
|||||||
Topic Description:So-called "910 loans" (Section 1325(a)) apply only to vehicles purchased for "personal use" Lines of Cases:
Topic Background / Overview:Text of the so-called "hanging paragraph" |
||||||||
No Ninth Circuit cases in database on this topic
The court sustained a 910 creditor's objection to confirmation of the debtor's plan. The court found that the amendment of a retail installment contract that changed the interest rate, lowered the monthly payments, and extended the term did not affect the lender's purchase money security interest.
The time period relevant in this inquiry is the time the vehicle was purchased.
The time period relevant in this inquiry is the time the vehicle was purchased.
Debtors are usually only allowed to deduct expenses for a single car. In this case, the court allowed the debtor to deduct expenses for two cars by proposing a plan that did not diminish what she would otherwise pay towards a plan if she only had one car.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
"To determine whether the vehicle was acquired for personal use for purposes of Section 1325(a), this court asks whether the business needs served by acquiring the vehicle are ancillary to the personal needs of his business or trade. The test used by the Hill Court effectively deems a personal use vehicle a business vehicle if there exists any business use at all. The Hill test is unreasonable because it allows a vehicle primarily used to satisfy personal needs to easily escape the restrictions of Section 1325(a) simply because a debtor drives to work in it. In contrast, the Solis Court's 'substantial material test' assumes personal use unless the car is used almost entirely for business purposes. The Solis test is unreasonable because it ignores the fact that, in reality, most business vehicles will occasionally be used to satisfy personal needs. The test articulated in Joseph allows a reasonable amount of personal use vehicle. This, the Joseph test is the most reasonable test to use in the instant case."
Debtor's claim for Chapter 13 relief was filed more than 910 days after debtor bought the car in question. The court found that the car should be valued as of the hearing date, using Section 506(a)(2) -- the retail value minus the cost of repairs needed to bring the car into sellable condition.
Specifically, the court interpreted the "age and condition" language of Section 506(a)(2) to mean the cost of bringing the car into sellable condition.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
"Examples of a business purpose include where the debtor's employer required him to have a particular vehicle to conduct the business of the employer, and paid for its costs and expenses to operate, or where the debtor actually uses the vehicle within the scope of employment."
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for the use of non-filing spouse was not a 910 car, even when the debtor later became its sole user.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased by debtor and her mother that was used by debtor only for transporting her mother, when debtor had another car for her personal use, was not a 910 car.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased exclusively for use of non-filing spouse was not a 910 car.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
The time period relevant in this inquiry is the time the vehicle was purchased.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for use primarily by non-filing spouse was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for exclusive use of non-filing spouse was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for the use of independent adult son was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Because the Gran Prix was not acquired for Debtor's personal use, the hanging paragraph does not apply to Nissan's claim.
Debtor must demonstrate that the "acquisition of the vehicle enabled the debtor to make a significant contribution to the gross income of the family unit".
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased by debtor for independent adult daughter who had bad credit was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased primarily for use of co- filing spouse was not a 910 car.
Debtor must demonstrate that the "acquisition of the vehicle enabled the debtor to make a significant contribution to the gross income of the family unit".
Debtor must demonstrate that the "acquisition of the vehicle enabled the debtor to make a significant contribution to the gross income of the family unit".
Car purchased for debtor's son, who occasionally took debtor on errands was a 910 car.
The court sustained a 910 creditor's objection to confirmation of the debtor's plan. The court found that the amendment of a retail installment contract that changed the interest rate, lowered the monthly payments, and extended the term did not affect the lender's purchase money security interest.
The time period relevant in this inquiry is the time the vehicle was purchased.
The time period relevant in this inquiry is the time the vehicle was purchased.
Debtors are usually only allowed to deduct expenses for a single car. In this case, the court allowed the debtor to deduct expenses for two cars by proposing a plan that did not diminish what she would otherwise pay towards a plan if she only had one car.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
"To determine whether the vehicle was acquired for personal use for purposes of Section 1325(a), this court asks whether the business needs served by acquiring the vehicle are ancillary to the personal needs of his business or trade. The test used by the Hill Court effectively deems a personal use vehicle a business vehicle if there exists any business use at all. The Hill test is unreasonable because it allows a vehicle primarily used to satisfy personal needs to easily escape the restrictions of Section 1325(a) simply because a debtor drives to work in it. In contrast, the Solis Court's 'substantial material test' assumes personal use unless the car is used almost entirely for business purposes. The Solis test is unreasonable because it ignores the fact that, in reality, most business vehicles will occasionally be used to satisfy personal needs. The test articulated in Joseph allows a reasonable amount of personal use vehicle. This, the Joseph test is the most reasonable test to use in the instant case."
Debtor's claim for Chapter 13 relief was filed more than 910 days after debtor bought the car in question. The court found that the car should be valued as of the hearing date, using Section 506(a)(2) -- the retail value minus the cost of repairs needed to bring the car into sellable condition.
Specifically, the court interpreted the "age and condition" language of Section 506(a)(2) to mean the cost of bringing the car into sellable condition.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
"Examples of a business purpose include where the debtor's employer required him to have a particular vehicle to conduct the business of the employer, and paid for its costs and expenses to operate, or where the debtor actually uses the vehicle within the scope of employment."
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for the use of non-filing spouse was not a 910 car, even when the debtor later became its sole user.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased by debtor and her mother that was used by debtor only for transporting her mother, when debtor had another car for her personal use, was not a 910 car.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased exclusively for use of non-filing spouse was not a 910 car.
Court recognized the dual role vehicles play (business and personal) and examines the totality of the circumstances to determine if the car is predominantly used to perform functions of a business or trade.
The time period relevant in this inquiry is the time the vehicle was purchased.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for use primarily by non-filing spouse was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for exclusive use of non-filing spouse was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased for the use of independent adult son was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Because the Gran Prix was not acquired for Debtor's personal use, the hanging paragraph does not apply to Nissan's claim.
Debtor must demonstrate that the "acquisition of the vehicle enabled the debtor to make a significant contribution to the gross income of the family unit".
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased by debtor for independent adult daughter who had bad credit was not a 910 car.
If the car is purchased for the use of a non-filing person like a spouse, child etc., the car will not be considered to be purchased for the debtor's personal use and can be crammed down.
Car purchased primarily for use of co- filing spouse was not a 910 car.
Debtor must demonstrate that the "acquisition of the vehicle enabled the debtor to make a significant contribution to the gross income of the family unit".
Debtor must demonstrate that the "acquisition of the vehicle enabled the debtor to make a significant contribution to the gross income of the family unit".
Car purchased for debtor's son, who occasionally took debtor on errands was a 910 car.
All Cases A to Z
If you're not familiar with what "case law" is, and how to use it, check out Chapter 7 of Nolo's LegalResearch: How to Find and Understand the Law for a guide to how to read through a case to get the parts that matter.
Also, you need to be familiar with the concept of "jurisdiction." Here are some helpful links:
When you read a case, check to make sure that the case's decision applies to your local district. Do this by looking at which court has decided the case -- either the U.S. Supreme Court, a court of appeal (listed here in large type), or a district court (listed in small type). Your local district court judge is not bound to follow the opinion of judges from other district courts, but often they look to these cases for advice. Your local district, however, is bound to follow decisions in cases from it governing circuit court. You'll see fairly few Supreme Court case here, but those cases are also binding on all districts."
NO! NO! NO! This is a start for your research. New cases are constantly being decided. I update this when I have time. This is only a fraction of the actual published opinions out there. Dozens of cases are handed down nationwide every week. I catalog interesting ones when I have time. They are meant to serve as a starting point for your research -- NOT as a comprehensive listing of the current state of the law.