The Bankruptcy Lawyers Blog

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

Although October 17, 2005 is the day that lives on in infamy in all of our minds, it was two years ago this month that BAPCPA was actually enacted.   The Commercial Law League of America's Bankruptcy Section conducted a survey within the bankruptcy industry--business bankruptcy practitioners, consumer bankruptcy practioners, judges, trustees, creditors representatives, and non-attorney professionals.

The data gathered, though unsurprising, shows some unfortunate trends:

• Most consumer practitioners surveyed increased their fees as a result of BAPCPA
• 1/3 of respondents shifted their client mixes as a result of BAPCPA--this, too, is heavily weighted toward consumer bankruptcy attorneys
• Some firms eliminated consumer debtor representation altogether, and some cut out all debtor representation
• 1/3 of respondents had eliminated pro bono representation as a result of BAPCPA
• More than 12% said pro bono representation had been reduced as a result of BAPCPA
• 17% of respondents (some debtor representatives and some representing creditors) said they would no longer handle reaffirmation agreements because of BAPCPA

Asked which consumer provision they would repeal if they could choose only one, 55% of respondents opted to knock out the means test.  Pre-filing credit counseling came in second, at about 20%.  Although 36% of respondents said reaffirmation agreements worked better before the amendments and 17% had opted out of participating in the reaffirmation process altogether, only 8% of respondents chose the reaffirmation provisions as their first choice for repeal.

The full article by Catherine Vance, with additional survey results, is available at the Bankruptcy Litigation Blog.