I have filed for Ch 7 bankruptcy back in June pro se, and I will be having my 341 meeting early next month. I will be surrendering my home as it is hopelessly upside down. I have received a letter from the creditor for my first mortgage that is a motion for the termination of the automatic stay. From what I have read this is standard procedure when surrendering the home, but I am in no way sure about this. I am very concerned about the wording of the motion, and would appreciate feedback from anyone who has some knowlege or experience with this sort of thing. Here are the paragraphs that I am concerned about:
9. The automatic stay provided under 11 U.S.C. §362(a) should be terminated as to
Creditor, and its successors and assigns. Once the stay is terminated, Creditor may proceed,
pursuant to applicable non-bankruptcy law, to exercise all of its legal remedies and rights, including
any right of assessment of reasonable fees and costs as provided by contract or statute, to enforce its
lien against the above-described property. In the alternative, the debtor should be ordered to
provide Creditor with adequate protection of its interest in the Property.
10. Creditor further seeks relief in order to, at its option, offer, provide and enter into
any potential forbearance agreement, loan modification, refinance agreement or other loan
workout/loss mitigation agreement. Any such agreement shall be non-recourse unless included in a
reaffirmation agreement. Creditor further requests that it be allowed to contact the debtor via
telephone or written correspondence to offer such an agreement.
Is this standard wording for terminating the automatic stay? What kind of reasonable fees or assessments are they talking about? What do they mean about "adequate protection of its interest in the property?"
Do I need to get a lawyer to help me with this. I can if it's absolutely necessary, but I am trying to avoid it as money is very tight.
I was under the impression that all that would happen after the home was surrendered was that the house would go into foreclosure and that would be it. This motion doesn't sound like it is working towards that. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
