The result regarding disallowance lower than § 502(b)(2) “is to try to guarantee you to definitely loan providers except that [new creditor carrying new education loan] found their fair share of your house
nine Select § 346.1 [ College loans ] § 158.2 College loans. See, age.grams., Leeper v. Pennsylvania High Educ. Assistance Agency, 44 F.three dimensional 98 (three-dimensional Cir. 1995) (Applying Bruning v. United states, 376 You.S. 358, 84 S. Ct. 906, eleven L. Ed. 2d 772 (1964), unmatured postpetition interest towards a nondischargeable education loan isn’t deductible and survives discharge in a section thirteen case.); For the re Hamilton, 179 B.Roentgen. 749 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1995) (Equilibrium of student loan would-be nondischargeable in the conclusion of costs less than Section thirteen bundle in spite of that Institution off Degree failed so you’re able to prompt file a proof of claim in addition to debtor recorded a proof allege on behalf of the newest Agency during the a keen matter disputed by Company.); Ridder v. Great Lakes Large Educ. Corp. (From inside the lso are Ridder), 171 B.Roentgen. 345, 346–47 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1994) (“Though says for postpetition notice are disallowed during bankruptcy proceeding, immediately after bankruptcy this new proprietor out of a nondischargeable obligations will get collect from the latest borrower directly. Bruning v. You, 376 U.S. 358, 84 S. Ct. 906, eleven L. Ed. 2d 772 (1964). . . . Because financial obligation was not discharged, High Ponds may gather the brand new postpetition attract from [brand new debtor] directly. . . . The fact that High Lakes’ allege for postpetition interest will have started disallowed doesn’t have anything related to if or not postpetition attract is dischargeable.”); From inside the lso are Shelbayah, 165 B.R. 332 (Bankr. Letter.D. Ga. 1994) (Unmatured postpetition notice towards the an educatonal loan isn’t a permitted allege significantly less than § 502(b)(2), and particularly attention will continue to accrue during the Chapter 13 instance. ).
Every unmatured postpetition attract can get a similar nondischargeable reputation once the the underlying education loan under § 1328(a)
ten Pick lower than contained in this section to see §§ 155.dos [ Long-Title Bills ] § 88.nine A lot of time-Term Costs, 159.step one [ An offer: Much easier Legislation to possess Classification regarding Unsecured States ] § A proposition: Much easier Laws and regulations to possess Group away from Unsecured States and you may 346.1 [ Figuratively speaking ] § 158.dos Student loans. Find, elizabeth.g., During the re also Williams, 253 B.Roentgen. 220, 232 (Bankr. W.D. Tenn. 2000) (“It court doesn’t prove Section 13 arrangements that provide for the fresh new percentage of interest to help you education loan loan providers, however to other unsecured creditors.”); Into the re Shelbayah, 165 B.R. 332, 337 (Bankr. Letter.D. Ga. 1994) (Unmatured postpetition focus on the an educatonal loan is not deductible inside the a section thirteen instance lower than § 502(b)(2), for example attract will continue to accrue for the Chapter 13 case, additionally the accruing desire contains the same nondischargeable reputation because the hidden student loan not as much as § 1328(a). ”). Agreement Leeper v. Pennsylvania Higher Educ. Advice Service, 44 F.3d 98 (3d Cir. 1995); During the lso are Hamilton, 179 B loan till payday Rugby ND.R. 749 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1995); Ridder v. Great Ponds High Educ. Corp. (From inside the lso are Ridder), 171 B.R. 345 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1994).
eleven Inside lso are Boggan, 125 B.Roentgen. 533 (Bankr. Letter.D. Sick. 1991). Agreement When you look at the lso are Gregg, 179 B.R. 828, 830 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. 1995) (Debtor normally on their own classify around three college loans having fee in full where almost every other unsecured claim holders was paid down only .74%. “All the student education loans in cases like this are nondischargeable below 11 You.S.C. § 523. Hence, a separate group for these says doesn’t unfairly discriminate against one other unsecured creditors.”). Pick plus In re Dillon-Bader, 131 B.R. 463 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1991) (When you look at the context of good-faith objection to help you confirmation, it is not improper having a chapter 13 debtor in order to on their own categorize Fix financing to possess one hundred% commission when you’re investing other unsecured claim holders 10% because Heal fund need to be paid-in complete pursuant to 42 You.S.C. § 294f(g).).