Tavara Santos Pena

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
TAVARA SANTOS PENA,
Debtor.
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 08-00043
(Chapter 13)
Not for Publication in
West’s Bankruptcy Reporter
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADDRESSING OBJECTIONS
OF THE DEBTOR TO THE PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING THE MOTION
OF WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK FOR RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY
Washington Mutual Bank filed a motion for relief from the
automatic stay in this case, and at a hearing on the motion, the
court directed Washington Mutual to prepare a proposed order
reflecting the court’s ruling. 	On April 30, 2008, Washington
Mutual filed a proposed order reflecting the court’s ruling.
I
On May 2, 2008, the debtor filed a praecipe (docket entry
number 79) objecting that the court had miscalculated the amount
to be paid by the debtor. 	The debtor agrees that her monthly
mortgage payment obligation is $356.23. 	She further concedes
that she owes monthly postpetition payments for the months of
February through April 2008 totaling $1068.69. 	At the hearing,
The order below is hereby signed.
Signed: May 15, 2008.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 08-00043 Doc 86 Filed 05/16/08 Entered 05/16/08 09:12:47 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 6

2
the court directed that the $1068.69 was to be cured over a
period of six months. 	Finally, the debtor concedes that the
court directed that $775 in attorneys fees were to be paid over
six months. 	Adding the $1068.69 and the $775 equals $1843.69.
Dividing that sum by six months equals $307.28 each month. 	That
is precisely the cure amount (to bring missed payments current
and pay attorneys fees) that the proposed order directs that the
debtor shall pay each month commencing May 10, 2008 and
continuing through October 10, 2008. 	At the hearing, the court
also directed that the debtor was to resume making her regular
monthly postpetition payments of $356.23 per month commencing
with the monthly payment for the month of May 2008 on May 10,
2008.
The debtor complains that the figures are forcing the debtor
to pay double, but does not explain why she thinks this is the
case. 	(Later praecipes, discussed below, clear up the mystery as
to why she thinks this is the case, but, as discussed below, do
not establish that she is being required to pay double.) 	The
order would not make the debtor pay double, and the objection
must be overruled.
II
On May 12, 2008, the debtor filed two praecipes. 	The first
one (docket entry number 84) again objects that the proposed
order would make her pay twice, but as explained above, the
Case 08-00043 Doc 86 Filed 05/16/08 Entered 05/16/08 09:12:47 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 6

3
proposed order does not make her pay twice. 	The praecipe,
however, explains how it is that the debtor has come to the
mistaken belief that the proposed order would make her pay twice.
She states that it was agreed at a hearing that the amounts owed
for February through April 2008 would be paid within “the next
weeks.” 	That is not the court’s recollection of what it directed
at the hearing. 	To the extent that the debtor pays the months of
February through April 2008 now, that will be treated as a credit
towards the monthly cure amount of $307.28.
III
The second praecipe filed on May 12, 2008, attaches two U.S.
Postal Service customer receipts for money orders in the
respective amount of $900.00 and $168.69, both made payable to
Washington Mutual and indicating that these payments aggregating
$1068.69 are intended as payments for the months of February
through April 2008. 	If, indeed, those payments have been made to
Washington Mutual, they will be treated as a credit towards the
monthly cure amount of $307.28 that the debtor is required to
Case 08-00043 Doc 86 Filed 05/16/08 Entered 05/16/08 09:12:47 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 6

1 	The second praecipe filed on May 12, 2008, appears
principally to address Washington Mutual’s proof of claim setting
forth a total arrearage as of January 23, 2008. 	The debtor
already has pending an objection to Washington Mutual’s proof of
claim and the court will consider the praecipe at the hearing on
the objection to Washington Mutual’s proof claim. 	The second
praecipe filed on May 12, 2008, also challenges the $775.00 in
attorney’s fees incurred after the commencement of the case as
excessive, but the court has already ruled against the debtor on
that issue.
4
make. 1
IV
In accordance with the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the debtor’s objections to the proposed order
regarding Washington Mutual’s motion for relief from the
automatic stay (docket entry number 45) are overruled. 	It is
further
ORDERED that if the debtor has already made the payments
aggregating $1068.69, as reflected by the U.S. Postal Service
customer receipts attached to the second praecipe (docket entry
number 85) filed on May 12, 2008, then the debtor shall be
entitled to have that aggregate payment of $1060.69 treated as a
credit towards her obligation to make a cure payment of $307.28
each month commencing on May 10, 2008, such that:
• 	the cure payments due on 	May 10, June 10, and July 10,
2008 (aggregating $921.84) will have been paid;
• 	the cure payment due on August 10, 2008 will have been
partially paid in the amount of $146.85, leaving only
Case 08-00043 Doc 86 Filed 05/16/08 Entered 05/16/08 09:12:47 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 6

5
$160.43 as the unpaid balance of the cure payment due
on August 10, 2008 (to be applied to the $775.00
attorney fee obligation); and
• 	cure payments of $307.28 each will remain to be paid on
September 10 and October 10, 2008, in order to complete
payment of the $775.00 in attorney’s fees (Washington
Mutual having agreed via the terms of the proposed
order it submitted that an aggregate payment of $774.99
will suffice to satisfy that debt).
It is further
ORDERED that if the aggregate amount of $1,068.69 in
postpetition money order payments was indeed paid, and instead of
having the payments applied as set forth in the foregoing
paragraph, the debtor may opt to amend in writing her previous
direction on the money orders regarding how the $1,068.69 in
payments are to be applied and direct Washington Mutual to apply
the $1,068.69 instead to the amounts that are required to be paid
under the other order signed today (reflecting the court’s ruling
regarding the motion for relief from the automatic stay) in the
order in which such payments are required to be made under that
order, that is, directing that the $1,068.69 be reapplied:
• 	first to the cure payment of $307.28 and the regular
monthly payment of $356.23 due May 10, 2008; and
• 	then to the cure payment of $307.28 and the regular
Case 08-00043 Doc 86 Filed 05/16/08 Entered 05/16/08 09:12:47 Desc Main
Document Page 5 of 6

6	O:\Judge Temp Docs\Pena Mem Decsn and Order re Objections to Wash Mut Proposed Order re MFRS.wpd
monthly payment of $356.23 due June 10, 2008, leaving
$258.33 required to be paid on June 10, 2008,
and leaving the cure payments and regular payments for July
through October 2008 still fully owed (and with regular payments
due as well for the months after October 2008). 	A copy of any
such writing shall be sent to Washington Mutual’s attorney,
Gregory N. Britto.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: Debtor; Chapter 13 Trustee; Gregory N. Britto, Esq.
Case 08-00043 Doc 86 Filed 05/16/08 Entered 05/16/08 09:12:47 Desc Main
Document Page 6 of 6