Rita Elaine Hardy

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
RITA ELAINE HARDY,
Debtor.
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 08-00346
(Chapter 13)
Not for Publication in
West’s Bankruptcy Reporter
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER REQUIRING DEBTOR TO
RE-SERVE OBJECTION TO CLAIM OF CITIFINANCIAL AUTO CORPORATION
The debtor mailed her objection to the amended proof of
claim of CitiFinancial Auto Corporation to an attorney who had
represented that creditor with respect to a motion for relief
from the automatic stay. 	That attorney, however, had not filed
the amended proof of claim. 	The amended proof of claim (as well
as the original proof of claim) indicated that notices were to be
sent to:
CitiFinancial Auto Corporation
P.O. Box 9578
Coppell, TX 75019-9578
Accordingly, the debtor has not made proper service under Rule
3007.
On the merits, the debtor challenges the validity of the
amended proof of claim by asserting:
The document below is hereby signed.
Signed: May 13, 2010.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 08-00346 Doc 131 Filed 05/13/10 Entered 05/13/10 10:37:13 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 3

[T]he debtor disputes the amount claimed in the Proof
of Claim. 	The 2004 Lexus ES automobile serial number
JTHBA30G445051299, which was the basis for the Proof of
Claim was returned to the creditor and is presumed to
have been sold.
But the amended proof of claim is consistent with the automobile
having been sold. 	The original proof of claim asserted a secured
claim of $28,917.95 as of the petition date. 	The amended proof
of claim was filed more than a year after the creditor filed a
notice that there had been a default that permitted it, pursuant
to the terms of a consent order, to treat the automatic stay as
having been terminated to permit it to repossess and sell the
automobile. 	The amended proof of claim asserted an unsecured
claim of $20,391.18, and this presumably reflects that after
costs of repossession and auctioneering, slightly more than
$8,500 was realized from the sale of the collateral. 	The amended
proof of claim is prima facie correct, and the debtor has alleged
no facts and filed no affidavits to rebut the prima facie
validity of the amended proof of claim. 	Even if there had been
proper service and the objection had stated valid grounds for
disallowing the claim, the lack of affidavits rebutting the prima
facie validity of the amended proof of claim would require that
the court not sustain the objection without an evidentiary
hearing.
The amended proof of claim includes a toll-free telephone
number for contacting the creditor. 	The objection to the amended
2
Case 08-00346 Doc 131 Filed 05/13/10 Entered 05/13/10 10:37:13 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 3

proof of claim gives no indication that the debtor’s attorney has
contacted the creditor to discuss any of the concerns of the
debtor regarding the accuracy of the amended proof of claim. 	It
is thus
ORDERED that by June 1, 2010, the debtor shall serve the
objection to claim anew, amending the objection to state facts
that would be a basis for disallowing the claim. 	It is further
ORDERED that the hearing on the present objection to the
amended proof of claim is canceled.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: Debtor; Debtor’s attorney; Chapter 13 Trustee; and
CitiFinancial Auto Corporation
P.O. Box 9578
Coppell, TX 75019-9578
3	O:\TEEL\Judge Temp Docs\Hardy (Rita Elaine) - Order to Re-Serve Objection to CitiFinancial Amended Proof of Claim.wpd
Case 08-00346 Doc 131 Filed 05/13/10 Entered 05/13/10 10:37:13 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 3