Charles A Wade

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
In re:
Charles A. Wade,
Debtor.
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 26-30675
Chapter 7
Judge Crist
ORDER GRANTING DEBTOR’S REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY WAIVER OF
THE CREDIT COUNSELING REQUIREMENT PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(3)
(DOC. 16) IN RESOLUTION OF THE ORDER, SUA SPONTE, TO SHOW CAUSE
FOR POTENTIAL DISMISSAL OF CASE UNDER 11 U.S.C. § 707(a), AND
ORDERING OTHER MATTERS (DOC. 30)
I. 	Introduction
This case concerns a unique set of circumstances, as testified to by the pro se debtor, based
upon which the Court determined to grant a temporary waiver of the credit counseling requirement
under 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(3).
II. 	Background
On March 30, 2026, Charles A. Wade (“Mr. Wade” and “Debtor”), appearing pro se, filed
a Voluntary Petition (Doc. 1) (the “Petition”) under chapter 7 of title 11 of the United States Code
(the “Bankruptcy Code”). In response to the requirement to “[t]ell the court whether you have
received a briefing about credit counseling[,]” the Debtor checked the box in his Petition, which
was signed under penalty of perjury, to certify that he “asked for credit counseling services from
an approved agency, but was unable to obtain those services during the 7 days after [he] made [his]
This document has been electronically entered in the records of the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 29, 2026
Case 3:26-bk-30675 Doc 34 Filed 06/29/26 Entered 06/30/26 12:58:16 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 7

2
request, and exigent circumstances merit a 30-day temporary waiver of the requirement.” Pet. at
5, Part 5, item 15. In the Request for 30-day Temporary Waiver of Credit Counseling Briefing
Requirement (the “Request for Waiver”) included with Mr. Wade’s Petition and as separately filed
(Doc. 9), his explanation of why he was unable to obtain credit counseling briefing before filing
for bankruptcy and the exigent circumstances that required him to file the case, he only wrote
“extreme poverty, Mental Health Disability PTSD.” Req. for Waiver (Doc. 1 at 9; Doc. 9). On
April 9, 2026, the Debtor filed a Certificate of Counseling (Doc. 16), which indicates that Mr.
Wade completed the credit counseling briefing in compliance with 11 U.S.C. §§ 109(h) and 111
on April 9, 2026, which was ten (10) days after he filed his Petition (Doc. 1) on March 30, 2026.
Upon review, the Court determined that the Request for Waiver—the Debtor’s certification
under § 109(h)(3)1—did not provide sufficient detail for the Court to determine if the Debtor met
the criteria for a temporary waiver of the credit counseling briefing requirement. Therefore, on
June 3, 2026, the Court entered an order sua sponte (Doc. 30) (the “Show Cause Order”) setting
this matter for an evidentiary hearing (the “Show Cause Hearing”) on the Request for Waiver and
to show cause why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to § 707(a) and Federal Rule of
Bankruptcy Procedure (“Bankruptcy Rule”) 1017 for failure to complete the credit briefing
required by 11 U.S.C. § 109(h) prior to filing the Petition.
The Show Cause Hearing was held on June 25, 2026, with Mr. Wade, again, appearing
pro se. Also in appearance was Pamela Arndt, Counsel for the United States Trustee. Mr. Wade
testified, showed the Court documents in support of his assertions, and ultimately the Court
accepted two of his documents into evidence, being Exhibits A and B, which were a screenshot of
chat between him and the credit counseling agency, Abacus Credit Counseling, and a letter from
an employee of Abacus Credit Counseling explaining the details of when Debtor began and
completed his credit counseling.
III. Facts
The Debtor testified that while he was living at 439 Grafton Avenue, #2, Dayton, Ohio
45406,2 he had been unable to pay his electric bill with AES, that he was close to having his service
1 Hereinafter, unless specifically noted, all sections cited are sections of the Bankruptcy Code.
2 Debtor testified that the address he has used as his residence address in his Petition and in other filings, which is in
Xenia, Ohio, is a family member’s address.
Case 3:26-bk-30675 Doc 34 Filed 06/29/26 Entered 06/30/26 12:58:16 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 7

3
shut off, and that he was very concerned about this because his daughter, who he has shared
custody of, was staying with him and without electricity he would have no heat. Thus, he explained
that he began the process of preparing to file his bankruptcy online through the Court’s website,
presumably through the Court’s Electronic Self Representation (eSR) portal on Saturday, March
28, 2026, but he realized shortly into that process that he needed to complete a credit counseling
course in order to file. On that same day, through a search on the internet, Mr. Wade found Abacus
Credit Counseling (“Abacus”) and registered to take the course, and in fact began the online credit
counseling course late that evening, completing all requirements except the final two steps, which
required him to speak to a live credit counselor and to pay for the course to receive his certificate
of credit counseling. Mr. Wade testified that he was unable to make the payment at that time due
to more urgent expenses that had depleted his funds on hand, and that he needed to work3 to get
additional funds to complete the payment in order to get his certificate. Mr. Wade testified that he
applied for a waiver of the fee with Abacus, but he only received a minor reduction.
Mr. Wade testified that he was unable to pay the fee for the credit counseling on Saturday,
March 28, 2026,4 and therefore needed to earn some money before he could complete his
counseling and obtain the certificate. However, after a day of “dashing” for Door Dash, Mr.
Wade’s ability to pay for credit counseling was further delayed due to an incident during a traffic
stop for expired license plate by the Englewood Police Department on March 29, 2026, for which
all charges were dropped against him, but which not only caused his car to be impounded, but also
required him to get physical therapy for injuries allegedly suffered. Therefore, Mr. Wade had to
use the funds he was planning to use to pay for his credit counseling certificate to retrieve his car
from the impound lot. Mr. Wade testified that he filed his bankruptcy petition on Monday, March
30, 2026, the following day, because he feared that his electricity would be disconnected.
Ultimately, Mr. Wade was finally able to speak with a live counselor and to pay for the course on
April 9, 2026, the same day he filed his Certificate of Credit Counseling (Doc. 16). The Court
admitted Debtor’s Exhibit A, a copy of an online chat with an Abacus representative, and Exhibit
3 Mr. Wade periodically works as a “dasher” for Door Dash.
4 Mr. Wade also applied for and was granted (Doc. 21) a waiver of the chapter 7 filing fee based upon his Application
to Have the Chapter 7 Filing Fee Waived (Doc. 7) (the “Application”), in which he stated under penalty of perjury
that he had one dependent, that he has no average monthly net income, that he receives Medicaid assistance, and that
he is “unemployed PTSD filing for disability[.]” Application at 1. In addition, Mr. Wade asserted that he had $0.00 in
cash and only $23.00 in his checking account at the time of filing. Application at 2.
Case 3:26-bk-30675 Doc 34 Filed 06/29/26 Entered 06/30/26 12:58:16 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 7

4
B, a letter sent by Abacus to Mr. Wade as a PDF attachment to an email. Both Exhibits provided
evidence of the timeline described by the Debtor, stating that he registered for the online course
on March 28, 2026, but was unable to complete the final steps to obtain a certificate at that time,
and subsequently submitted payment for the course and completed the live counseling requirement
on April 9, 2026. The United States Trustee, through a brief cross-examination of the Debtor,
clarified this series of events, and ultimately did not have an objection to the Court granting the
Request for Waiver.
IV. Analysis
Under 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(1), an individual may not be a debtor under the Bankruptcy Code
unless they have, “during the 180-day period ending on the date of filing of the petition by such
individual, received from an approved nonprofit budget and credit counseling agency” an
individual or group briefing. Once completed, this is evidenced by a certificate of credit
counseling. The Debtor readily admits that he had not completed the final two steps to obtain his
credit counseling certificate at the time of filing, but he asserts that this was because he lacked the
funds necessary to complete the final step—to pay for the counseling.
Section 109(h)(1) is subject to paragraph (3), which provides a three-part test under which
“the requirements of paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to a debtor” although this is, in
turn, subject to subparagraph (B) of § 109(h)(3). See 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(3)(A) and (B).
Subparagraph (B) essentially limits the duration of a temporary waiver to thirty (30) days, except
that the Court can extend this by order for an additional fifteen (15) days. Nonetheless, in this case
Mr. Wade filed his Certificate of Counseling (Doc. 16) on April 9, 2026, just ten (10) days after
filing his Petition, such that if he is able to satisfy the three elements under § 109(h)(3)(A) his
chapter 7 bankruptcy would not need to be dismissed for ineligibility.
As the Court previously set forth in its Show Cause Order, the relevant portion of the
Bankruptcy Code, § 109(h)(3)(A), that governs temporary waivers—exemptions—states as
follows:
(3)(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), the requirements of paragraph (1) shall not
apply with respect to a debtor who submits to the court a certification that—
(i) describes exigent circumstances that merit a waiver of the requirements
of paragraph (1);
Case 3:26-bk-30675 Doc 34 Filed 06/29/26 Entered 06/30/26 12:58:16 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 7

5
(ii) states that the debtor requested credit counseling services from an
approved nonprofit budget and credit counseling agency, but was unable to
obtain the services referred to in paragraph (1) during the 7—day period
beginning on the date on which the debtor made that request; and
(iii) is satisfactory to the court.
11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(3)(A). Thus, the question before the Court is whether Mr. Wade can establish
these three criteria.
There is some support in caselaw for the notion “that a debtor who lacks sufficient
resources to pay for credit counseling may, under the right circumstances, have a de facto
‘inability’ 	to 	obtain 	pre-bankruptcy 	credit 	counseling 	for 	purposes 	of 	11 	U.S.C.
§ 109(h)(3)(A)(ii)[,]” and indigency may be a “satisfactory” reason for a temporary waiver
pursuant to § 109(h)(3)(A)(iii)). In re Piontek, 346 B.R. 126, 130 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2006).
However, as also observed in the Piontek case, “Charles Dickens once wrote in his masterpiece
Great Expectations, ‘Take nothing on its looks; take everything on evidence. There’s no better
rule.’ ” Id. Thus, although § 109(h)(3)(A) states that the requirement to obtain the credit counseling
briefing prior to filing bankruptcy can be waived based upon a certification, this Court found it
necessary, in this case (particularly when the debtor is pro se), to conduct an evidentiary hearing
to determine whether the Debtor could meet the criteria.5
As noted below, this Court has previously concluded that under 11 U.S.C. § 707(a)
bankruptcy courts have discretion, based on unique factual circumstances, to decline to dismiss a
debtor’s bankruptcy case for failing to strictly comply with § 109(h), as confirmed by the existence
of § 109(h)(3)(A). In re Risden-Curnutte, No. 25-31656, 2025 Bankr. LEXIS 3074, at *3-4 (Bankr.
S.D. Ohio Nov. 20, 2025) (citing In re Hess, 347 B.R. 489 (Bankr. D. Vt. 2006)). The In re Kernan
case is instructive to resolution of the matter before this Court. 358 B.R. 537 (Bankr. D. Conn.
2007). Therein, the Bankruptcy Court observed that, “[h]ad Congress intended the recent
amendments [of BAPCPA6] to provide a nondiscretionary dismissal of a case in the context
5 The Court has previously proceeded in a similar fashion, which resulted in granting a temporary waiver, albeit in a
different unique circumstance in which the debtor was represented by counsel. See Order Concerning Credit Briefing
Requirement of 11 U.S.C. § 109(h) (Doc. 8) and Withdrawing Order, Sua Sponte, Scheduling: (1) Show Cause
Hearing; and (2) Hearing to Review Attorney Fees, and Ordering Other Matters (Doc. 13), In re Risden-Curnutte, No.
25-31656, 2025 Bankr. LEXIS 3074 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio Nov. 20, 2025) (granting a temporary waiver and not
dismissing the debtor’s case under § 707(a)).
6 The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Pub. L. No. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23.
Case 3:26-bk-30675 Doc 34 Filed 06/29/26 Entered 06/30/26 12:58:16 Desc Main
Document Page 5 of 7

6
presented here, it would have included provisions to achieve that result.” Id. at 539. That Court
further observed that “§ 707, which relates to dismissal of a case, employs the permissive ‘may.’
Moreover, the code section defining eligibility for bankruptcy relief, § 109(h), does not include a
provision for mandatory dismissal.” Id. In short, because § 707(a) “does not specifically provide
for the dismissal of a case for the failure of a debtor to receive the requisite credit counseling,” and
employs the permissive “may,” Congress granted bankruptcy courts discretion to deal with special
circumstances such as this. Id.; see also In re Hess, 347 B.R. 489, 498 (Bankr. D. Vt. 2006). This
is confirmed by § 109(h)(3)(A), which contains the three-factor requirement for certifications by
debtors who seek a temporary waiver of the requirement to have completed the credit counseling
briefing prior to filing bankruptcy.
The unique facts of this case, in which the Debtor appears to have earnestly, albeit if not
imperfectly, attempted to comply with the requirements of the statute, substantially completed the
online portion of the credit counseling prior to filing bankruptcy, and took action as soon as
possible to complete the counseling process after obtaining the necessary funds to pay the
associated fee, but impeded by an apparent interim run-in with law enforcement and need to get
his vehicle out of impound (and obtain physical therapy), justify a temporary waiver of the credit
counseling requirement under the three-part test that permits a temporary waiver of up to at least
thirty (30) days. 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(3)(A) and (B). The Court finds that the Debtor’s testimony
and Exhibits A and B, along with documentation that he introduced during the Show Cause
Hearing to corroborate his testimony, support that there were “exigent circumstances” meriting a
waiver under these unusual circumstances, the Debtor could not complete the briefing within the
seven-day period, and the testimony and evidence submitted were satisfactory to the Court. 11
U.S.C. § 109(h)(3)(A).7 The Court also finds that Debtor’s bankruptcy, which was his first since
2015, was not filed in bad faith.
V. 	Conclusion
The Debtor, under the circumstances, took reasonable steps to timely complete the credit
counseling briefing prior to filing his chapter 7 bankruptcy case and completed it when he was
able to pay the associated fee. No creditor or party-in-interest, other than the United States Trustee,
7 The narrow circumstances involving a permanent waiver of the credit briefing requirement do not apply to this case.
See 11 U.S.C. § 109(h)(4).
Case 3:26-bk-30675 Doc 34 Filed 06/29/26 Entered 06/30/26 12:58:16 Desc Main
Document Page 6 of 7

7
appeared at the Show Cause Hearing or otherwise opposed granting the Debtor a temporary waiver
under § 109(h)(3)(A). And the United States Trustee, who cross-examined Mr. Wade during the
hearing, did not oppose the temporary waiver. Therefore, based on the specific and unique
circumstances of this case, the Court hereby grants the Debtor a temporary waiver of ten (10) days
under § 109(h)(3)(A), such that his Certificate of Counseling (Doc. 16) is deemed timely, Mr.
Wade is eligible to be a debtor in this chapter 7 case and therefore the Court declines to dismiss
this case for cause under § 707(a) based on the Court’s prior Show Cause Order (Doc. 30) entered
on June 3, 2026.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Copies to:
All Creditors and Parties in Interest, Plus
Charles A. Wade, 1139 Glen Kegley Dr., Xenia, OH 45385-4783
Pamela Arndt, Office of The United States Trustee, 170 North High Street, Suite 200, Columbus,
OH 43215 (Counsel for the United States Trustee)
Case 3:26-bk-30675 Doc 34 Filed 06/29/26 Entered 06/30/26 12:58:16 Desc Main
Document Page 7 of 7