What’s the process for if the new venue doesn’t issue a stay, but the final outcome is that they strike down the relief? (I’m really asking.) My payments start back up, and then a month later they double or triple based on the outcome of the case? I just assumed the new venue would stay the relief from going into effect before making a ruling, but you’ve made me nervous.
You’ve actually stated one of the main reasons that TROs are issued. One of the required showings by the petitioning party is to demonstrate “imminent” and “irreparable harm.” In this case the imminent is shown by the plan’s policies and planned implementation as well as the fact that there was a date promulgated for commencement. Irreparable harm would be demonstrated by something similar to your scenario – the petitioner would argue that if it goes into effect and the final determination is that it should not have been permitted to go into effect, that monies which should have been rightfully collected are forever lost, absent an otherwise unnecessary affirmative and costly process of collecting on the marginal difference of payments owed.
To more directly answer your question, the court would direct the companies to collect in a manner which is least onerous to both parties (debtor and creditor); likely a long period of increased collections or (IMHO, more likely) extending the payment period to collect the now-again additional amount due.
I agree with you though, I think given the circumstances and gravity to individual debtors in this case the prudent thing is to stay implementation of the program.
Thank you, a great explanation. The whole situation makes me feel like a rag doll being tossed around the courts. Do I start repaying now? No? Tell me when….Now? No? False alarm. Okay, how about now? I want the relief, but at this point I’d take any decision so I can just make a freaking budget that I can stick to.
Happy to help! And, I totally feel you on the ragdoll thing. I’ve got a lot of dollars in loans in repayment from law school and it would be nice to just be able to work on a budget that I knew wasn’t going to change drastically in a few months (again).
It’s both. The case is being transferred and the program can go into effect (unless the new venue issues a TRO).
What’s the process for if the new venue doesn’t issue a stay, but the final outcome is that they strike down the relief? (I’m really asking.) My payments start back up, and then a month later they double or triple based on the outcome of the case? I just assumed the new venue would stay the relief from going into effect before making a ruling, but you’ve made me nervous.
You’ve actually stated one of the main reasons that TROs are issued. One of the required showings by the petitioning party is to demonstrate “imminent” and “irreparable harm.” In this case the imminent is shown by the plan’s policies and planned implementation as well as the fact that there was a date promulgated for commencement. Irreparable harm would be demonstrated by something similar to your scenario – the petitioner would argue that if it goes into effect and the final determination is that it should not have been permitted to go into effect, that monies which should have been rightfully collected are forever lost, absent an otherwise unnecessary affirmative and costly process of collecting on the marginal difference of payments owed.
To more directly answer your question, the court would direct the companies to collect in a manner which is least onerous to both parties (debtor and creditor); likely a long period of increased collections or (IMHO, more likely) extending the payment period to collect the now-again additional amount due.
I agree with you though, I think given the circumstances and gravity to individual debtors in this case the prudent thing is to stay implementation of the program.
Thank you, a great explanation. The whole situation makes me feel like a rag doll being tossed around the courts. Do I start repaying now? No? Tell me when….Now? No? False alarm. Okay, how about now? I want the relief, but at this point I’d take any decision so I can just make a freaking budget that I can stick to.
Happy to help! And, I totally feel you on the ragdoll thing. I’ve got a lot of dollars in loans in repayment from law school and it would be nice to just be able to work on a budget that I knew wasn’t going to change drastically in a few months (again).
As predicted: Biden’s student loan relief is back on hold after day of legal whiplash.
Makes sense.