Lawsuit lending is a non-recourse loan where a lawsuit funding company extends a line of credit to a Plaintiff until a suit is settled. If the lawsuit is unsuccessful, the Plaintiff does not have to repay the funding company. The loan, in the form of a line of credit, usually stipulates the Plaintiff will have to pay the loan back, plus interest, if the lawsuit is successful.

The practice has been around for a long time but currrently is under ethical scrutiny. Abraham Lincoln once said, “Never stir up litigation. A worse man can scarcely be found than one who does this.”

Lawyers appear to stand the most to gain from stirring up litigation.

In lawsuit lending, ethical matters have always revolved around a Plaintiff’s inability to fund a lawsuit. Assuming a Plaintiff has a legitimate reason for suing and cannot afford a lawsuit, is it ethical to allow him to miss an opportunity for justice because he is poor?

There has always been and always will be a fine line between that which is unethical and that which is accepted by society as ethical. A civilized society must determine, through their court systems, what is ethical.

Each individual has their own ideas about what they think is ethical or right or wrong, but to live in a civilized society the society must make their own decisions. This is the purpose of laws.

So how does a lawyer avoid ethical controversies with their clients? One way is to use an informational approach to their client solicitation. In lawsuit lending, a law firm should be able to inform a client if there are any legal opportunities that would allow the potential client to receive legal justice. As a matter of fact, that is exactly what consulting with an attorney means. It is the duty of every attorney to inform a potential client of any opportunity to find a legal remedy for justice in their particular circumstances.

Clients, once informed, have the best opportunity to make the right decisions for themselves. As a content legal writer, it is the job of the writer to provide information for potential legal clients so they can make informed decisions, not to make the decision for them or solicit their business by telling them what they should do.

Unlike infomercials which try to stir up the emotions of a client to buy a particular product, legal advertising directs readers to information which helps them make informed decisions.

Bankruptcy laws come under the same ethical considerations and it is important, if you are considering bankruptcy, to find a bankruptcy lawyer to answer your questions. A lawyer can provide information what will help you make an informed decision.

If you need relief from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan areas of Tampa, St. Petersburg, or Clearwater, Florida, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com . We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area that who can answer your bankruptcy questions.

Many of you feel like an atom bomb has been dropped when your credit rating crashes down after filing bankruptcy. What could be worse? A creditor getting a judgment against you and asking for a debtor’s exam.

A debtor’s exam occurs when a debtor is legally called into a court by a creditor who has a lawsuit judgment against the debtor. The debtor is sworn in and asked to provide the judgment holder with answers about the debtor’s assets. The questions include details about the debtor’s assets. If the debtor refuses to answer the questions while on the witness stand or refuses to answer the subpoena to appear, he or she could be arrested for contempt of court.

This personal bankruptcy story was posted on the internet in January of 2011:

“My wife and I were forced into bankruptcy. A collection company called us into a debtors exam to find out where I work and find out everything we own so they could put a lien on it. I had a job loss and was trying to recover and got socked with this debtors exam.

I tried to avoid bankruptcy at all costs, but it was coming down to the collection company taking food out of my 5 kids mouth and our basic needs being taken from us. I filed bankruptcy in October and my qualifying debts were discharged in December. It has dropped an atom bomb on our already crappy credit but it gave us a new start and drove the snakes away!”

Bankruptcy is difficult. The debtor alludes to an “atom bomb on an already crappy credit.” The imagery used by the debtor may sum up how many people feel about what happens during a bankruptcy, but his observation is an exaggeration. He may have felt like his credit rating going so low hit him like an atom bomb, but in reality, the debtor’s exam is what forced him into bankruptcy protection, not his credit rating.

By the time most debtors go bankrupt and have lawsuit judgments filed against them their credit scores are already low. Filing bankruptcy may lower a credit score to the 400′s if a debtor had credit before he or she went bankrupt. In the case of the illustration, the debtor was already past bankruptcy and into lawsuit judgments that could have certainly lowered his score to 400 or less.

There are reasons for having zero credit, but bankruptcy is not one of them. Credit reports simply don’t work that way. A zero credit score occurs because you have no credit history at all. This can happen because you reported identity theft, never used credit, have been convicted of a felony, or you have not had any credit in the past seven years.

You can live without a credit score. Credit scores can also be restored after filing for bankruptcy protection, especially if you pay your bills on time. Creditors who see your bankruptcy on a credit report know you cannot file again for up to eight years, and if you are paying your bills on time, a bankruptcy filing can be viewed as a positive step in eliminating your financial problems. Many credit companies will take a risk on people who legally take responsibility for their financial problems.

If you have been forced into bankruptcy by a debtor’s exam, contact a bankruptcy lawyer. If you need relief from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan counties of Nassau or Suffolk, New York, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com .We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area who will answer your bankruptcy questions.

Are you facing a home forelosure? Have you been tempted to take matters into your own hands? There have been a lot of stories where former homeowners have stripped their home and left nothing but a shell for the mortgage company.

This personal bankruptcy story was shared on an internet blogging site:

“We left our house empty, took the sheds, appliances, kitchen sink, bathroom sinks and vanities, ceiling fans, light fixtures, sold the HVAC for $400, sold the hot water heater for $60, and sold the deck and playhouse that we had built. We even took the satellite dish. I figured whoever buys the house is going to re-do it all, so I figured we were doing them a favor as the emptier it is the better. I did however cap all the plumbing and generally weatherize the house.”

Depending on what state you live, the general rule of thumb is if the fixture comes with a house and is a part of the taxing entity for that house, it stays with the house. Another general rule of thumb is if any improvement on a home is attached, like a covered patio, even if you added the improvement, most states will make you leave the improvement as part of the house. Finally, in some states, if a shed has a concrete foundation, it is part of the property. Fences are generally considered part of the property because they are attached to the property grounds.

Depending in which state you live, stripping a home can be a crime. It is considered a tort of waste, but in Surprise, Arizona in 2009, a grand jury indicted man on charges of criminal damage and defrauding a secured creditor. He was arrested for fraud. In some states, stripping a home could be considered vandalism.

If a bankruptcy court trustee finds out you have stripped a home that is being held in the bankruptcy estate, he has several options. When you act in bad faith, the trustee has the option of dismissing the bankruptcy with prejudice so that you no longer will be able to file, and he could also recommend you be investigated for defrauding the secured creditor.

Filing for bankruptcy is a legal proceeding designed to protect debtors. It also may allow debts to discharge certain types of qualified debts or restructure existing debt payments. Bankruptcy fraud is a crime and common criminal acts under bankruptcy laws typically involve concealment of assets, concealment or destruction of documents, conflicts of interest, fraudulent claims, false statements or declarations, and fee fixing. Destruction of a secured creditor’s property can be considered a debtor/creditor conflict.

If the local authorities or the bankruptcy court doesn’t get you for stripping a home, insurance companies may follow-up on claims they consider vandalism. They will pay for the damage and either file criminal charges against the responsible parties or they will file a civil lawsuit to collect the money owed. Insurance companies have the means to pursue the offenders and can be relentless in their pursuit.

Stripping a foreclosed home is no way to get even. The best thing to do when it comes to foreclosures is to ask what property you may keep, especially if you are not sure if it is part of the home you are vacating. Don’t take anything off the property if you are not sure.

Bankruptcy laws can be complicated. Contact a bankruptcy lawyer if you have questions. If you need relief from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan area of San Diego, California, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com .We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area who will answer your bankruptcy questions.

In the Old World, including most modern European countries and England, creditors used to be put debtors in prison for failing to pay their bills. Today, failing to pay bills most likely won’t result in a prison sentence, but it can enslave you.

In Spain for instance, mortgage loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy cases. If a man borrows money against his home and has a co-signer on the note, and if the debtor defaults on the loan, the lender can foreclose taking possession of the secured property. The debtor and co-signer will not be relieved from paying the note, including the principal, interest, penalties, and court fees.

Once the mortgage lender gets a judgment against the debtor in Spain, they can garnish wages leaving the debtor as little as $835 per month to live. By the time the lender adds all of the court costs, interest and penalties, the borrower and co-signer often owe more than the purchase price of the property and paying off the loan can take a lifetime.

The Great Recession of 2007 affected Spain just like it did the United States. An estimated 1.4 million Spaniards are facing potential foreclosure proceedings, similar to what the United States currently faces. Recent figures from the courts show that the numbers in Spain are rising fast. In 2007, there were just 26,000 foreclosures. In 2009, there were more than 93,000.

The United States, the colonist’s New World, has come a long way since the days of debtor’s prisons. Today, U.S. bankruptcy cases handle foreclosures differently than some of the countries from the Old World.

In the New World today, when it comes to secured loans, all actions to collect debts like foreclosures are automatically stopped until a bankruptcy plan or liquidation process takes place. Once an automatic stay has been applied by the bankruptcy court, the creditor must go through the bankruptcy trustee to deal with the debtor.

Depending on where you live, deficiency claims over what the house sells for can be discharged at the close of bankruptcy filings. Court costs, expenses in foreclosing, penalties, interest and any other expense for disposing of the property can also be discharged. The lender will only receive whatever money they make from the sale of the property. If the money received is more than the money owed the lender, the debtor will receive the equity, less any expenses.

Bankruptcy laws passed in the U.S. to balance the older laws favoring creditors have basically been designed to help honest debtors become productive citizens. Bankruptcy is a legal proceeding designed to protect both creditor and debtor and to allow the honest person or business to start fresh.

If you are facing foreclosure, it may be time to talk to a bankruptcy lawyer. If you need relief from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan areas of Riverside or San Bernardino, California, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com .We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area who will answer your bankruptcy questions.

Baseball has long been labeled as America’s pastime, but is the American pastime currently embracing Un-American concepts? “Un-American” is a pejorative term of United States political discourse which is applied to people or institutions in the United States viewed as deviating from U.S. norms.

The writer of this article is questioning the view that what may be happening to baseball in the Los Angeles Dodger bankruptcy case might be considered as nothing less than Un-American. Maybe the word is too strong, but a federal bankruptcy court judge last Friday rejected the Los Angeles Dodger’s plan to borrow $150 million from a hedge fund in order to pay-off its creditors. The judge instead ordered the owner of the Dodgers, Frank McCourt, to accept Major League Baseball’s (MLB) offer for a loan of the same amount but with better terms. Judge Kevin Gross stated the loan could not lead to the control of the team. 

MLB’s commissioner, Bud Selig, has been having a running battle with Frank McCourt since he bought the Dodgers in 2004. Selig has made numerous comments about McCourt and his wife’s extravagant lifestyle of luxury, and he has as much as accused McCourt of skullduggery. Selig’s accusations came when Fox television made a deal that would have solved the Dodger’s financial woes. The deal would have provided an upfront loan of $385 million. Selig nixed the deal saying the loan would enrich McCourt and his wife and their extravagant lifestyle, and the television deal was not in the best interest of baseball and the Dodgers.

Whether or not you agree with McCourt’s flamboyant lifestyle is a matter of personal choice, but if an owner of a business is not breaking any laws, is the way an individual private owner runs a business morally and legally subservient to a group? If McCourt has committed skullduggery, surely there is criminal laws that have been broken. Why is Selig not seeking prosecution of McCourt instead of seeking to gain control of the team’s finances?

The judge said the loan was not to lead to control, but who is going to monitor the level of control? Giving MLB the financial strings is already giving them a form of control in being able to ask how, when and why the money is to be spent. Nevertheless, control is not the main factor in this discussion of being Un-American. The economic philosophy behind the desire to obtain control is.

Whether or not it was the intent of the judge, the results in favoring the group of MLB over private ownership of the Dodgers can be perceived as a victory for collectivism. Collectivism is defined as any philosophic, political, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human in some collective group and the priority of group goals over individual goals. On the surface, the concept seems very much like a good idea for the group, but when the idea violates individual rights, in reality, the idea can be very Un-American.

MLB operates as a corporation. Corporatism refers to a form of collectivism that views the whole as being greater than the sum of its individual parts, and gives priority to group rights over individual rights.

The whole nature of the MLB is to promote the group as a whole, to protect some kind of perceived image the group must protect. The Commissioner has been hired by the group to protect its image so they can sell the image to the American people. The only thing wrong with that concept is that it is all about money and protecting a small group’s perception of what they think is right for the game. The group seems to care less about individual rights than it does about end results.

The two opposing philosophies in this case are diametrically working against one another. McCourt represents the American time honored right of private enterprise and Selig represents an opposing force which wants to absorb individual rights for the benefit of his group. In this case, collectivism just won a major battle.

To compensate for the move made by MLB on the television contract, McCourt used one of his individual rights by filing for bankruptcy protection. He lost his appeal to the bankruptcy court, hopefully, because the judge thought the best financial solution for McCourt’s business was the MLB loan.

 If you need a bankruptcy lawyer, contact us here and you will be directed to an attorney who can help answer any questions you may have about bankruptcy laws.

In 1978, the Supreme Court made a ruling that would change the face of how banks dealt with credit card interest. The Marquette Bank opinion permitted national banks to export interest rates on consumer loans from the state where credit decisions were made to borrowers nationwide. Existing federal rules required banks to have a formal invitation from the legislature of the state they wanted to enter before they could set up operations outside their home state.

It wasn’t long before states like South Dakota and Delaware took full advantage of the new jobs the banks offered for coming to their states. South Dakota’s legislature first passed laws in 1980 effectively eliminating their existing usury laws so Citibank could move their credit card operating headquarters to the state. Citibank eventually delivered 3,000 high paying jobs to the state and ignored all the other state’s maximum usury rates.

In 1980 Washington began a move, led by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), to peg the rate of interest at a certain number of points above the Federal Reserve Discount Rate. Specially chartered organizations like small loan companies and installment plan sellers would have their own rules. That means that the laws in most states do not have enough teeth to regulate credit card debt.

With states unable to regulate credit card debt, the banks were free to raise interest rates at any level they want, establish minimum payments, and increase the limits of their cards. All of these changes have been designed to get people into debt.

If you put $1000 on your credit card and the company has a 24% APR attached to it with a 2% minimum payment, your minimum payment will never reduce your debt. If you pay $20 a month for the rest of your life, you will never pay off the principal of $1000 worth of credit card debt. The principal amount could be paid-off in a little more the four years at that rate but none of the payment would ever go toward the principal.

In many cases, the only way a person can relieve exorbitant debt from various banking institutions is by filing bankruptcy. Unsecured debt can be discharged in a bankruptcy case.

This personal bankruptcy story was posted on the internet in August of 2011 as comments in a bankruptcy discussion: “I don’t own any luxury items. I don’t try to keep up with the Jones’s. I drive an inexpensive car. I don’t eat out or even have cable TV. I live on a modest budget, yet I owe about $14K on two credit cards. This started a few years ago, when the economy hit my family hard and forced us to live off the credit cards for a few months. Ever since then we’ve been trying to pay off our debt, but the universe seems to be working against us. I haven’t defaulted on any payments yet, but right now the minimum payment is so high that to pay all my bills I have been putting my entire paycheck toward the cards and then using the credit card to pay for all other necessities–basically, borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. As a result, the balance has slowly been creeping up, and I can no longer make the minimum payments.”

Maybe like the debtor in this personal bankruptcy illustration, you have felt the need to use your credit card to make ends meet. Maybe you are paying only the minimum payments in the form of interest on those cards. If this is case, you might be in financial trouble.

If you are bankrupt, you might need a bankruptcy lawyer to help you understand how complex bankruptcy laws may apply to your particular situation.

If you need relief from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan area of Atlanta, Georgia, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com .We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area who will answer your bankruptcy questions.

One dictionary defined the phrase “smoke and mirrors” as trickery or deception used often in a political context. The same dictionary said this expression alludes to the performances of stage conjurers who use actual smoke and mirrors to deceive the audience. The figurative use refers to the obscuring or embellishing of the truth that is employed by spin doctors to deceive the general public.

Never has the use of “smoke and mirrors” been more obvious than on NBC’s Meet the Press this past Sunday. In response to the downgrading of America’s credit rating by S&P last week, the Administration sent its hired spin doctors to the popular news show to politically trick the public into thinking there has been no wrong-doing by the Federal Government and their actions handling the national debt and budget.

Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve Chairman and now an Obama spin doctor, told Meet the Press the United States could rule out a chance of a U.S. default because of its ability to print money. “What I think the S&P thing did was to hit a nerve that there’s something basically bad going on, and it’s hit the self-esteem of the United States, the psyche,” said Greenspan. 

Greenspan claimed the plight of the investors is more about the euro zone thean the United States. “The United States was actually doing relatively well, sluggish but going forward until Italy ran into trouble. That destabilized the European system, and the crisis re-emerged. Europe is very critical of the United States…we have a fourth of our experts there, but more importantly, significant proportion of the foreign affiliate profits, in fact half of U.S. corporations, are in Europe.”

Austan Goolsbee, the chairman of the White House’s council of economic advisers and another Obama spin doctor, struck out at S&P on Meet the Press too. He attacked the S&P’s math claiming the credit rating agency had gotten the rating wrong. Goolsbee exclaimed, “Well, the basic case is they made a $2 trillion math error and forgot to check their work.” He also commented on comments made by Warren Buffet claimaing that if they had a AAAA, he would put U.S. Treasury credit instruments in AAAA status.

This is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. Greenspan, the washed up former Chairman who admittedly made errors before the banking crisis of 2007, doesn’t explain what will happen to the U.S. economy if the government begins to print money. Instead, he tries to divert America’s problem to Europe’s financial woes.

Addressing the printing money at will, a simple fifth grade math student will tell you our budget will not withstand an increase in interest past 10 percent and still be able to afford the interest on the national debt.

Historically, when the U.S. has printed more money, the value of the dollar drops, and when the value of the dollar drops, interest rates have risen. In contrast, the Voo Doo economics presented by the Chairman is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

Warren Buffet may be a financial wizard in playing the stock market, but he still loses money from time to time. He can be wrong, so can the ratings companies.

How can we solve our finacial crisis? Practicing sound financial economics is a start. The U.S. needs to reduce spending and return to sound economic principles. When a government or individual borrows more money than they can pay, it is bankrupt. It is disingenuous to ask the American public to believe by printing money at random we will always be able to pay our loans.

If you are facing a financial crisis like the U.S. Government, it may be time to contact a bankruptcy lawyer. If you need from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan area of Detroit, Michigan, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com .We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area who will answer your bankruptcy questions.

Standard & Poor’s (S&P) is a United States based financial services company and a division of the McGraw-Hill Companies (MHC). MHC publishes financial research and analysis on stocks and bonds, and S&P is one of the the big three credit rating services that includes Moody’s Investor Service and Fitch Ratings.

MHC, financially stable, has paid a stock dividend since 1937. In 2007, their stock was hovering around $60 per share at the beginning of the recession. The stock dipped to less than $20 per share and began a steady over $40 per share. The stock did not budge last Thursday, the day the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) fell 512 points. The DJIA has fallen 1300 points since the first of the year, whereas MHC has dramatically risen from $36 a share to almost $42 at the close Friday.

The rating business seems to be a good business to be in right now, but what is the purpose of the rating system? The purpose of ratings is to provide investors with information to assess the financial potential of a business entity to pay-off its creditors.

In this case, S&P down graded the ability of the United States to pay back its national debt. Prior to last Friday, the United States had enjoyed a AAA rating since 1917, the highest rating S&P gives. They downgraded the US to AA-plus, a rating not nearly as desirable for investors.

An S&P written statement on the downgrade read, “The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics.”

The downgrade follows infighting in Congress over whether to raise taxes or cut spending to reduce the government’s debt burden. A time limit on the national debt came dramatically close to default before both sides of the legislature acknowledged the government did not have the money to pay both the budget and debt payments without increasing the borrowing limit.

President Barack Obama signed legislation to end the controversy on August 2, 2011, the day the national debt payments were due. The new law is designed to reduce the deficit by $2.1 trillion over 10 years. These figures did not meet S&P’s suggestion of reducing the deficit by $4 trillion, an amount S&P said was “a good down payment” on fixing America’s financial woes.

This is not the first time in U.S. history that Congress has waited until the last minute to settle its budget and debt ceiling. In fact, in modern history, Congress has a paper trail of procrastinating over the national debt. My question is why is S&P just now responding to the national debt?

The United States has been in debt over a trillion dollars since 1980. Under President George W. Bush, the national debt increased by $6.1 trillion.

Any good fifth grade math student can decipher whether we can continue to pay our debts if interest rates go up, so I wonder if we are smarter than a fifth grader. We should have been downgraded years ago, but why weren’t we? Is S&P’s new found concern reflecting their general interest in America’s overall condition or is it a political statement for control on how Congress and the Administration handles finances?

Whatever it is, creditors and debtors have similar issues for control. Creditors, who are doing well financially, often cannot see the debtor’s side of the issues, and debtors often can’t see the creditor’s side of the issues. When decisions are made by the creditor to force the debtor to do what they think he or she should do about the debt, bankruptcy filings normally follow.

When you can’t agree on debt solutions with your creditors, filing for bankruptcy can be a viable option. You may need a bankruptcy lawyer to help you understand how these options might apply in your particular circumstances.

According to an Associated Press release, many of the country’s pension funds have been bailing out of the stock market and putting large sums of cash into New York banks. Due to the influx of funds, the banks are being forced to place extra fees on the deposits to cover the FDIC premiums.

Banks are normally willing to pay interest on deposits, but with short term interest rates currently near zero, it is financially hurting the banks to hold so much cash. Some analysts fear these fees might also be passed down to the average bank customer until the economy stabilizes.

The nervousness the pension fund investors are feeling, turning their entire investment portfolios to cash, stems from our government recently saying it would not be able to meet all of its financial obligations if the country’s debt ceiling was not raised. Normally, pension fund managers invest in short-term Treasury Bills when volatility in the stock market arises, but the historic move to move the funds to cash might be setting a precedent within the U.S. banking system.

Large movements into cash by pension and other market funds underscores the nervousness in the overall market. The fact gold prices have been rising is another indicator investors are nervous about the slow growth and unsureness of the U.S. economy. Add the fact the Dow Jones Industrial Average dipped 513 points this past Thursday, erasing the gains it made for the year, and you have several reasons why consumers have lost faith in the U.S. economy.

There is good news, however, on the horizon. The government did raise the debt ceiling, assuring a smooth financial ride through the end of 2012. That crisis is over, and that is good news, and there may be time to fix our other financial problems.

The stock market will remain volatile for a while because it responds to any negative news across the globe. The stock market is not the driving indicator for the financial health of the country, but it is one of many indicators for the nervousness and panic of investors. For instance, the stock market crash before the Great Depression was one of many indicators economic hard times were about to occur, but we are living proof the crash was not the driving indicator because the economy eventually survived. It always does, and it will survive the current economic concerns.

The economy may continue to slowly recover, and jobs may be harder to find. A fast recovery of the economy would be helpful in producing more jobs, and increased jobs could be a sign the economy is growing.  

Since the stock market reacts to every bit of news across the world, I believe bankruptcies are a more stable indicator than how the stock market moves. Until bankruptcies begin to increase, there is not as much to be nervous about as many might think.

If you need relief from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan area of Los Angeles, California, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com .We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area who will answer your bankruptcy questions.

Financial security can build self-esteem and a sense of well being. Americans living the ”American dream” feel they are fortunate and generally view those who are less fortunate with compassion. Nevertheless, there is the temptation for many successful Americans to look down on the less fortunate or view them with a judgmental spirit.

This blogging comment was posted on the internet in November of 2007:

“People charge on their credit cards to “keep up with the Jones,” lease cars that they can’t afford and are fooled into buying houses they can’t afford. Then blame it on society’s advertising that coerced them into purchasing these products. Wake-up, you and I (the responsible ones) end up paying for their ignorance! Stop bankruptcy and bring back debtor’s prison.”

With the exception of the credit card and car purchase references, the blogger’s comments could have been made by any of Great Britain’s elite prior to the Revolutionary War. Many colonists went to the New World to escape debtor prison, but debtor prisons also existed in the New World forcing many early Americans to flee to debtor’s states. Debtor prisons are one of the reasons our founding fathers included the legislation of bankruptcy laws into the Constitution of the United States under Article 1, Section 8.

Americans risked everything to break away from their home country and start over. Many of our founding fathers who signed the Declaration of Independence went bankrupt after the Revolutionary War. Not only did they face the extreme challenges in governing a new nation, many had to start over. Certainly their self-esteem was challenged.

Since the Revolutionary War bankruptcy laws have evolved. Historically, creditors could put you in prison for not paying your bills, but today, filing for bankruptcy is a legal proceeding that is designed to protect both creditor and debtor and to allow the honest person or business to start over. 

Filing bankruptcy is not a sign of weakness, laziness, immorality, or dishonesty. Bankruptcy can happen for a variety of reasons including: divorce, catastrophic events, foreclosure on personal or business property, failure to pay bills on time, loss of income, health problems, poor business decisions, bad timing, bad advice, or a poor economy. If you are bankrupt it may be time to deal with your financial issues and consider bankruptcy.

If you need relief from the stress of debt and you live in or around the metropolitan areas of New Haven or Meriden, Connecticut, contact us at www.betterbankruptcy.com .We will help you find a bankruptcy attorney in your area who will answer your bankruptcy questions.