Opinion
Case No. 00-42086, Adv. No. 05-03012.
August 12, 2005
MANDEL, WEISMAN, HEIMBERG, BRODIE, P.A. Boca Raton, FL 33431. Attorneys for GE Capital Small Busines Finance Corporation.
SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF GE CAPITAL SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION AS TO COUNT III OF ADVERSARY COMPLAINT
COMES NOW the Plaintiff, GE CAPITAL SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as "GE"), by and through its undersigned counsel, in accordance with Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which applies in adversary proceedings pursuant to Rule 7056 of the Bankruptcy Rules of Procedure, and hereby moves this Court for entry of a Supplemental Order of Summary Judgment and Supplemental Final Summary Judgment in its favor as to Count III of the Adversary Complaint filed by Defendant, JUNG BEA HAN, and as grounds therefore allege:
STATUS OF PROCEEDINGS
1. On July 12, 2005, this Court entered an Order Granting in Part and Denying in part GE Capital Small Business Finance Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment (the "Ruling"). Essentially, this Court granted the majority of GE's Motion for Summary Judgment but denied only that aspect related to Count III since there was insufficient record evidence before the Court as to:
i. Whether the SBA purchased the guaranteed portion of the Han loan, and
ii. Wall Street Journal's published rates on applicable dates;
The Ruling specifically stated "The surviving Count III claims will be addressed by the Court at trial or as part of a further Motion for Summary Judgment, if presented". This Supplemental Motion is intended to address those remaining issues delineated by the Court as to Count III.
2. Based on the pleadings, amended responses to Requests for Admissions, the Affidavits attached hereto and the Court file as a whole, it is clear that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that GE is entitled to a Supplemental Summary Judgment as a matter of law as to Count III of Plaintiff's Adversary Complaint.
UNDISPUTED FACTS
3. In its Ruling, this Court correctly pointed out that the subject Promissory Note allowed GE to lock in the interest rate if the borrowers/debtors were in default when the SBA purchased the guaranteed portion of the loan. While there is clear record evidence of the borrowers/debtor's default in June of 2000, the record was heretofore void of any evidence as to whether the U.S. Small Business Administration ("SBA") purchased the guaranteed portion of the debt in order to allow GE to fix the interest rate at that time. In this regard, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is an Affidavit of Lenette Ross who is a Portfolio Administrative Manager at GE who has researched the loan file and determined that the SBA did not, in fact, purchase the guaranteed portion of the Han loan. Thus, based on the affidavit testimony of Ms. Roos, GE was not entitled to lock in the borrower's interest rate to a fixed rate effective June of 2000 since one of the conditions for lock in had not occurred.
DISCUSSION
4. Pursuant to the Ruling, the relevant time frame for inquiry as to whether a stay violation occurred by GE's pre-petition fixing of the interest rate on the debt is the post petition, pre-confirmation direct payments period; to wit, October, 2000 (the month of filing bankruptcy) through July, 2001 (the month that the Debtor's Second Amended Plan of Reorganization was confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court).
5. To assist the Court in reviewing the applicable interest rates throughout the relevant time frame, the following chart has been prepared for ease and reference:
As to prime rates, attached hereto as Exhibit "B" to this Supplemental Motion is a historical chart of prime rates as published by the Wall Street Journal. Pursuant to Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, this Court may take judicial notice of the content of the prime interest rate chart since, (i) it contains facts that are not subject to reasonable dispute, (ii) are generally known within the Northern District of Florida, and (iii) are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.
7. A review of the applicable interest rate chart in paragraph 5 above reveals two salient points. First, notwithstanding the unauthorized fixing of the interest rate effective June of 2000, the computation of the adjustable rate for the first four months of the relevant time period equals the fixed rate (12.25%). The second salient point is that once the payment history was corrected, Mr. and Mrs. Han were charged a fluctuating rate of interest during the balance of the relevant time period. In point of fact, Mr. and Mrs. Han have had the benefit of a fluctuating rate of interest throughout the entire term of the debt (see paragraph 1(d) Roos Affidavit and Paragraph 1(e) of Walter Affidavit).
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
8. Based on the review of the interest rate chart in paragraph 5 above, it is undisputed that GE charged a higher interest rate in six (6) of the ten (10) pre-confirmation payments than was authorized under the Note. Equally undisputed is the fact that GE corrected the interest charge six (6) months after the entry of the Order of Confirmation. In its Ruling, the Court recognized that charging higher interest rates on the pre-confirmation payments can be considered a stay violation based upon the broad interpretations by bankruptcy courts of what constitute "acts to obtain possession of property estate" 11 USC Sec. 362(a)(3); LTV Corp. vs. Gulf States Steel, Inc. of Alabama, 969 F.2d 1050 (DC Cir. 1992).
9. Section 362 of the Code imposes the automatic stay as a matter of law and provides a list of prohibited act and conduct which is effective upon the filing of a petition in bankruptcy. Section 362 provides in pertinent part:
(a) . . . a petition filed . . . operates as a stay . . . of —
. . .
(3) any act to obtain possession of property of the estate or of property from the estate or to exercise control over property of the estate.
. . .
(h) An individual injured by any willful violation of a stay provided by this section shall recover actual damages, including costs and attorney's fees, and in appropriate circumstances, may recover punitive damages.
10. The undisputed fact remains that any rate changes to the Han loan occurred effective June of 2000 which is clearly four (4) months in advance of the Chapter 13 filing of this bankruptcy by Mr. and Mrs. Han in October of 2000 (see paragraph 1(a) of Roos Affidvit). Thus, from the date of filing bankruptcy by Mr. and Mrs. Han through the entry of an Order of Confirmation in July of 2001, GE did not engage in any affirmative act that would constitute a stay violation under subparagraph (a)(3) of Section 362. In order for this Court to find a stay violation by GE, it would be necessary to conclude that GE's failure to recognize a mistaken pre-petition rate lock of the Han loan prior to confirmation of the debtor's Second Amended Plan constituted an act to obtain possession of property of the estate. While there is no case law found that is factually on point with the facts before this Court, it is clear that the Court need not decide whether or not GE's actions (or inactions in this instance) constituted a stay violation. That is because, even assuming arguendo, that GE's actions (or inactions) constituted a stay violation, it is undisputed that Mr. and Mrs. Han have suffered no damages. Absent any damages, stay violations cannot be compensated as a matter of law. In re Brooks, 207 B.R. 738 (Bkrtcy. N.D. Fla. 1997); In re Craine, 206 B.R. 594 (Bkrtcy. M.D.Fla. 1997).
11. To award actual damages for a stay violation, the Court must find that GE willfully acted in violation of the automatic stay. Brooks, supra; Craine, supra. In order for actions to be deemed "willful" the conduct of GE must have been deliberate and accompanied by GE's knowledge of the Han bankruptcy. In re Fernandez, 171 BR. 135 (Bkrtcy. M.D. Fla. 1991) and In re Boscia, 237 B.R. 184 (Bkrtcy. M.D. Fla. 1998). Since there are no post petition/pre-confirmation actions by GE related to the Han interest rate, there cannot be a finding of any willful action. There is no dispute that when the debtors filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy in October, 2000, the interest rate was already fixed on the date of filing. Thus GE did not engage in any conduct or action to fix the Han indebtedness on a post petition/pre-confirmation basis.
12. Even assuming arguendo that GE's failure to recognize a mistaken pre-petition fixing of the interest rate on the Han loan prior to the entry of an Order of Confirmation constituted "willful" conduct of GE, as previously stated, Mr. and Mrs. Han have suffered no damages since their entire payment history and application of all payments had been corrected in December, 2001 and they have continually received all benefits of the fluctuating interest rate throughout the entire term of the debt. The law is abundantly clear that assuming that a willful violation of the automatic stay exists, there can be no sanction for a violation if there are no actual damages. In re Martinez, 281 B.R. 883 (Bkrtcy. W.D. Tex. 2002) and Craine, supra. In Craine, the Court specifically ruled:
To recover under Section 362(h) of the Bankruptcy Code, however, a debtor must show not only the existence of a "willful violation," but must also show that he or she was injured by the violation.
The mandatory tone of section 362(h) does not, however, diminish a debtor's obligation to sufficiently prove his or her actual damages. `A damage award [under 362(h)] must not be based on "mere speculation, guess, or conjecture".'
In re Washington, 172 B.R. at 427. (Citations omitted.) This requirement is consistent with the language of Section 362(h) that mandates recovery for an individual "injured" by a willful violation.
13. Since December, 2001, Mr. Han has been provided with explanations and a revised payment history evidencing the correction related to the improper fixing of his interest rate and proper application of all payments. In this regard, the opinion in Martinez, supra is instructive. The Court ruled "in some cases, however, the actual damages will be nearly nonexistent, in which case no damages at all would need to be awarded (cite omitted) id. at 281". In the case sub judice there is simply no damages to be awarded (even if the Court found that a stay violation existed as a result of GE's inactions).
CONCLUSION
Since the interest rate on the Han loan was erroneously fixed before the date that Mr. and Mrs. Han filed for bankruptcy protection in October, 2000, there is no action taken by GE on a post petition basis related to the interest rate charged to Han (other than correcting the pre-petition error in December, 2001). Nonetheless, even if GE's failure to recognize its fixing of the interest rate on a post petition/pre-confirmation basis constituted an act to obtain possession of the property of the estate in violation of the automatic stay, it is undisputed that Mr. and Mrs. Han have suffered no damages inasmuch as all interest rate computations were corrected in December, 2001 and Mr. and Mrs. continued to maintain and receive the benefits of the fluctuating interest rate through the present date.
WHEREFORE, GE CAPITAL SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION prays this Court will grant its Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment and Summary Final Judgment as to Count III of the Adversary Complaint filed by Jung B. Han.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
In Re
JUNG BEA HAN Case No. 00-42086
Debtor
JUNG BEA HAN
Plaintiff
v. Adv. No. 05-03012
GE CAPITAL SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION
Defendant _________________________________/
AFFIDAVIT OF LENETTE ROOS
STATE OF MISSOURI ) )SS: COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS )
BEFORE ME personally appeared, LENETTE ROOS, who upon first being duly sworn, deposes and states:
1. My name is Lenette Ross and at all times material mentioned herein, I was a Portfolio Administration Manager employed by GE Capital Small Business Finance Corporation. I am making this Affidavit based upon my own personal knowledge and based upon my examination of business records of GE Capital Small Business Finance Corporation that are kept in the ordinary course of business. If called upon to testify, my statements set forth herein would be consistent with any testimony before the Court. I have reviewed the loan file respecting the Han transaction. Based upon my review, I have found the following:
a. As a result of a default in the June, 2000 payment by Mr. and Mrs. Han under their loan, the SBA was sent a letter by GE notifying them of the Han default. Further, at that time, GE fixed the rate of the Han loan to 12.25%, effective June 6, 2000.
b. However, at no time did the SBA ever purchase the guaranteed portion of the loan. In approximately November or December of 2001, Mr. Han requested that GE review the status of the interest rate to determine why it would have been fixed.
c. As a result of Mr. Han's inquiry, GE determined in November, 2001 that the Han loan should have remained a fluctuating rate of interest rather than a fixed rate of interest. As a result, the Han payment history was corrected to reflect the proper fluctuating interest rates during the relevant time period. On December 31, 2001, Mr. Han was sent a revised payment history evidencing the corrections and proper application of all payments.
d. Thus, from the inception of the loan through the present date, Mr. and Mrs. Han have paid a floating rate of interest that has been tied to the prime rate pursuant to the four corners of their Promissory Note obligation to GE.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this11th day of August, 2005 by LENETTE ROOS who is personally known to me.
__________________________ Notary Public
__________________________ My Commission Expires
Historical Chart
Prime Rate 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Jan 1 Feb 1 Mar 1 Apr 1 May 1 Jun 1 Jul 1 Aug 1 Sep 1 Oct 1 Nov 1 Dec 1
8.50% 8.50% 8.25% 8.50% 7.75% 8.50% 9.50% 4.75% 4.25% 4.00% 5.25% 9.00% 8.25% 8.25% 8.50% 7.75% 8.50% 8.50% 4.75% 4.25% 4.00% 5.25% 9.00% 8.25% 8.25% 8.50% 7.75% 8.75% 8.50% 4.75% 4.25% 4.00% 5.50% 9.00% 8.25% 8.50% 8.50% 7.75% 9.00% 8.00% 4.75% 4.25% 4.00% 5.75% 9.00% 8.25% 8.50% 8.50% 7.75% 9.00% 7.50% 4.75% 4.25% 4.00% 5.75% 9.00% 8.25% 8.50% 8.50% 7.75% 9.50% 7.00% 4.75% 4.25% 4.00% 6.00% 9.00% 8.25% 8.50% 8.50% 8.00% 9.50% 6.75% 4.75% 4.00% 4.25% 6.25% 8.75% 8.25% 8.50% 8.50% 8.00% 9.50% 6.75% 4.75% 4.00% 4.25% 6.25% 8.75% 8.25% 8.50% 8.50% 8.25% 9.50% 6.50% 4.75% 4.00% 4.50% 8.75% 8.25% 8.50% 8.25% 8.25% 9.50% 6.00% 4.75% 4.00% 4.75% 8.75% 8.25% 8.50% 8.00% 8.25% 9.50% 5.50% 4.75% 4.00% 4.75% 8.75% 8.25% 8.50% 7.75% 8.50% 9.50% 5.00% 4.25% 4.00% 5.00%In Re
JUNG BEA HAN Case No. 00-42086
Debtor
JUNG BEA HAN
Plaintiff
v. Adv. No. 05-03012
GE CAPITAL SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION
Defendant
AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN WALTER
STATE OF MISSOURI ) )SS: COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS )
BEFORE ME personally appeared, JOHN WALTER, who upon first being duly sworn, deposes and states:
1. My name is John Walter and at all times material mentioned herein, I am a Liquidation Specialist employed by GE Capital Small Business Finance Corporation. I am making this Affidavit based upon my own personal knowledge and based upon my examination of business records of GE Capital Small Business Finance Corporation that are kept in the ordinary course of business. If called upon to testify, my statements set forth herein would be consistent with any testimony before the Court. I have reviewed the loan file respecting the Han transaction. Based upon my review, I have found the following:
a. In October, 2001, Mr. Han contacted the SBA and GE requesting a review of the treatment of his interest rate by GE. A review of the account was thereafter initiated to determine if the interest rate should have been fixed.
b. As a result of Mr. Han's inquiry, GE determined in November, 2001 that the interest rate on the Han loan should have remained a fluctuating rate of interest rather than a fixed rate of interest.
c. Once GE determined that the interest rate should have remained a fluctuating rate, GE immediately commenced manual processing of corrections to the prior interest rates and provided for the proper application of corrected payments based on the re-computation of the interest rate.
d. Thereafter I received a letter dated December 29, 2001 from Mr. Han requesting an amended payment history to correct the account to reflect an adjustable rate of interest. See Han letter of December 29, 2001 attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
e. Since the Han account had been manually adjusted previously to correct interest rate charges and application of payments, on December 31, 2001, a new payment history was re-run and furnished to Mr. Han which reflected the adjustments and corrections. In this regard, see my correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
f. Thus, from the inception of the loan through the present date, Mr. and Mrs. Han have paid a floating rate of interest that has been tied to the prime rate pursuant to the four corners of their Promissory Note obligation to GE.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
______________________ JOHN WALTER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this11th day of August, 2005 by JOHN WALTER who is personally known to me.
________________________ Notary Public
________________________ My Commission Expires
VIA FASCIMILE 850/623-2166
December 31, 2001
Jung B. Han 6188 Hwy 90 West Milton, FL 32570
Re: Jung B. Han dba: Parkmore Laundry Dry Cleaners and Pace One Hour Cleaners GP# 853 216 3009 GE# 6102933-001
Dear Jung:
This letter is written in response to your fax to me dated December 29, 2001.
Attached is a copy of the Amended Payment History as requested.
Please explain in writing specifically how the pre-petition arrearage was not computed correctly by GE Capital.
If further questions, I can be reached at 800/447-2025, ext. 3549. My fascimile number is 314/205-3698.
Sincerely,
GE CAPITAL SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION, A Delaware corporation
By:
Printed Name: John Walter Title: Liquidation Specialist
Cc: Bruce Committe, Esquire (via regular mail) Attachments
DUE DATE ACT DATE INT THRU DAYS RATE PAYMENT $ INTEREST $ PRINCIPAL $ PRIN BAL 03/05/96 BALANCE FORWARD 59,072.50 04/06/96 04/05/96 03/31/96 27 11.50% 502.52 502.52 0.00 59,072.50 04/06/96 04/05/96 04/03/96 3 11.00% 71.21 53.41 17.80 59,054.70 05/06/96 05/06/96 04/11/96 8 11.00% 142.38 142.38 0.00 59,054.70 Additional Fundin; 04/12/96 04/11/96 0 11.00% 0.00 0.00 (16,250.00) 75,304.70 05/06/96 05/06/96 05/05/96 24 11.00% 544.67 544.67 0.00 75,304.70 06/06/96 06/07/96 05/07/96 2 11.00% 45.38 45.38 0.00 75,304.70 Additional Fundin; 05/08/96 05/07/96 0 11.00% 0.00 0.00 (16,250.00) 91,554.70 06/06/96 06/07/96 05/29/96 22 11.00% 607.02 607.02 0.00 91,554.70 Additional Fundin; 05/30/96 05/29/96 0 11.00% 0.00 0.00 (12,250.00) 103,804.70 06/06/96 06/07/96 06/04/96 6 11.00% 202.95 187.69 15.26 103,789.44 07/06/96 07/08/96 06/09/96 5 11.00% 156.39 156.39 0.00 103,789.44 Additional Fundin; 06/10/96 06/09/96 0 11.00% 0.00 0.00 (4,000.00) 107,789.44 07/06/96 07/08/96 07/01/96 22 11.00% 714.65 714.65 0.00 107,789.44 Additional Fundin; 07/02/96 07/01/96 0 11.00% 0.00 0.00 (8,125.00) 115,914.44 07/06/96 07/08/96 07/03/96 2 11.00% 96.96 69.86 27.10 115,887.34 08/06/96 08/05/96 08/04/96 32 11.00% 1,248.00 1,117.60 130.40 115,756.94 09/06/96 10/31/96 08/19/96 15 11.00% 523.28 523.28 0.00 115,756.94 Additional Fundin; 08/20/96 08/19/96 0 11.00% 0.00 0.00 (9,052.50) 124,809.44 09/06/96 10/31/96 09/02/96 14 11.00% 526.59 526.59 0.00 124,809.44 Additional Fundin; 09/03/96 09/02/96 0 11.00% 0.00 0.00 (10,000.00) 134,809.44 09/06/96 10/31/96 09/04/96 2 11.00% 98.13 81.26 16.87 134,792.57 10/06/96 11/20/96 10/06/96 32 11.00% 1,339.00 1,299.91 39.09 134,753.48 11/06/96 12/02/96 11/07/96 32 11.00% 1,339.00 1,299.53 39.47 134,714.01 12/06/96 02/28/97 12/04/96 27 11.00% 1,100.00 1,096.16 3.84 134,710.17 02/06/97 03/28/97 02/13/97 71 11.00% 2,917.00 2,882.41 34.59 134,675.58 03/06/97 04/08/97 02/17/97 4 11.00% 165.00 162.34 2.66 134,672.92 03/06/97 05/01/97 03/17/97 28 11.00% 1,174.00 1,136.40 37.60 134,635.32 04/06/97 06/03/97 03/31/97 14 11.00% 568.05 568.05 0.00 134,635.32 04/06/97 06/03/97 04/12/97 12 11.25% 531.95 497.96 33.99 134,601.33 04/06/97 06/30/97 04/17/97 5 11.25% 239.00 239.00 0.00 134,601.33 05/06/97 06/30/97 04/19/97 2 11.25% 68.00 51.40 16.60 134,584.73 05/06/97 07/01/97 05/20/97 31 11.25% 1,300.00 1,285.92 14.08 134,570.65 06/06/97 07/16/97 06/21/97 32 11.25% 1,368.00 1,368.00 0.00 134,570.65 07/06/97 07/16/97 07/15/97 24 11.25% 1,368.00 954.70 413.30 134,157.35 08/06/97 08/11/97 08/10/97 26 11.25% 1,368.00 1,075.08 292.92 133,864.43 09/06/97 09/17/97 09/12/97 33 11.25% 1,368.00 1,361.56 6.44 133,857.99 10/06/97 10/07/97 10/06/97 24 11.25% 1,368.00 990.17 317.83 133,480.16 11/06/97 11/03/97 11/02/97 27 11.25% 1,368.00 1,110.80 257.20 133,222.96 12/06/97 12/05/97 12/04/97 32 11.25% 1,368.00 1,313.97 54.03 133,168.93 01/06/98 01/05/98 01/04/98 31 11.25% 1,368.00 1,272.40 95.60 133,073.33 02/06/98 02/09/98 02/06/98 33 11.25% 1,368.00 1,353.51 14.49 133,058.84 03/06/98 03/09/98 03/08/98 30 11.25% 1,368.00 1,230.33 137.67 132,921.17 04/06/98 04/07/98 04/06/98 29 11.25% 1,368.00 1,188.09 179.91 132,741.26 05/06/98 05/14/98 05/09/98 33 11.25% 1,368.00 1,350.14 17.86 132,723.40 06/06/98 07/03/98 06/11/98 33 11.25% 1,368.00 1,349.95 18.05 132,705.35 07/06/98 07/24/98 07/14/98 33 11.25% 1,368.00 1,349.77 18.23 132,687.12 08/06/98 08/14/98 08/13/98 30 11.25% 1,368.00 1,226.89 141.11 132,546.01 09/06/98 09/28/98 09/15/98 33 11.25% 1,368.06 1,348.14 19.92 132,526.09 10/06/98 10/08/98 09/30/98 15 11.25% 612.70 612.70 0.00 132,526.09 10/06/98 10/08/98 10/07/98 7 11.00% 755.30 279.57 475.73 132,050.36 11/06/98 11/06/98 10/31/98 24 11.00% 955.10 955.10 0.00 132,050.36 11/06/98 11/06/98 11/05/98 5 10.75% 388.90 194.45 194.45 131,855.91 12/06/98 12/07/98 11/30/98 25 10.75% 970.85 970.85 0.00 131,855.91 12/06/98 12/07/98 12/06/98 6 10.50% 347.15 227.58 119.57 131,736.34 01/06/99 01/06/99 01/05/99 30 10.50% 1,295.00 1,136.89 158.11 131,578.23 02/06/99 02/05/99 02/04/99 30 10.50% 1,295.00 1,135.53 159.47 131,418.76 03/06/99 03/02/99 03/01/99 25 10.50% 1,295.00 945.12 349.88 131,068.88 04/06/99 04/06/99 04/04/99 34 10.50% 1,295.00 1,281.95 13.05 131,055.83 05/06/99 05/07/99 05/06/99 32 10.50% 1,295.00 1,206.42 88.58 130,967.25 06/06/99 06/07/99 06/06/99 31 10.50% 1,295.00 1,167.93 127.07 130,840.18 07/06/99 07/29/99 06/30/99 24 10.50% 903.33 903.33 0.00 130,840.18 07/06/99 07/29/99 07/10/99 10 10.75% 391.67 385.35 6.32 130,833.86 08/06/99 08/12/99 08/11/99 32 10.75% 1,317.00 1,233.05 83.95 130,749.91 09/06/99 09/23/99 08/31/99 20 10.75% 770.17 770.17 0.00 130,749.91 09/06/99 09/23/99 09/13/99 13 11.00% 546.83 512.25 34.58 130,715.33 10/06/99 10/28/99 10/17/99 34 11.00% 1,341.00 1,339.38 1.62 130,713.71 11/06/99 12/30/99 11/11/99 25 11.00% 1,000.00 984.82 15.18 130,698.53 11/06/99 01/03/00 11/19/99 8 11.00% 341.00 315.10 25.90 130,672.63 12/06/99 01/31/00 11/30/99 11 11.00% 433.18 433.18 0.00 130,672.63 12/06/99 01/31/00 12/22/99 22 11.25% 907.82 886.06 21.76 130,650.87 01/06/00 02/28/00 01/08/00 17 11.25% 700.00 684.57 15.43 130,635.44 01/06/00 03/01/00 01/23/00 15 11.25% 641.00 603.96 37.04 130,598.40 01/06/00 03/28/00 01/24/00 1 11.25% 27.00 27.00 0.00 130,598.40 02/06/00 03/28/00 02/26/00 33 11.25% 1,363.00 1,341.59 21.41 130,576.99 02/06/00 04/27/00 02/27/00 1 11.25% 5.00 5.00 0.00 130,576.99 03/06/00 04/27/00 02/29/00 2 11.25% 115.73 115.73 0.00 130,576.99 03/06/00 04/27/00 03/29/00 29 11.50% 1,207.27 1,193.08 14.19 130,562.80 03/06/00 05/25/00 03/30/00 1 11.50% 45.00 45.00 0.00 130,562.80 04/06/00 05/25/00 03/31/00 1 11.50% 37.26 37.26 0.00 130,562.80 04/06/00 05/25/00 05/02/00 32 11.75% 1,353.74 1,344.97 8.77 130,554.03 04/06/00 06/30/00 05/03/00 1 11.75% 2.00 2.00 0.00 130,554.03 05/06/00 06/30/00 05/31/00 28 11.75% 1,216.80 1,216.80 0.00 130,554.03 05/06/00 06/30/00 06/05/00 5 12.25% 246.20 219.08 27.12 130,526.91 06/06/00 11/07/00 07/04/00 29 12.25% 1,290.00 1,270.40 19.60 130,507.31 07/06/00 12/05/00 08/02/00 29 12.25% 1,290.00 1,270.21 19.79 130,487.52 08/06/00 01/03/01 08/31/00 29 12.25% 1,290.00 1,270.02 19.98 130,467.54 09/06/00 02/06/01 09/29/00 29 12.25% 1,290.00 1,269.82 20.18 130,447.36 10/06/00 03/06/01 10/28/00 29 12.25% 1,290.00 1,269.63 20.37 130,426.99 11/06/00 04/04/01 11/26/00 29 12.25% 1,290.00 1,269.43 20.57 130,406.42 12/06/00 05/07/01 12/29/00 33 12.25% 1,465.00 1,444.30 20.70 130,385.72 01/06/01 06/05/01 01/31/01 33 12.25% 1,465.00 1,444.07 20.93 130,364.79 02/06/01 07/05/01 03/08/01 36 11.25% 1,465.00 1,446.51 18.49 130,346.30 08/06/01 08/08/01 03/31/01 23 11.25% 924.03 924.03 0.00 130,346.30 08/06/01 08/08/01 04/14/01 14 10.75% 540.97 537.46 3.51 130,342.79 09/06/01 09/06/01 04/30/01 16 10.75% 614.22 614.22 0.00 130,342.79 09/06/01 09/06/01 05/13/01 13 10.25% 498.78 475.84 22.94 130,319.85 10/06/01 10/05/01 05/31/01 18 10.25% 658.74 658.74 0.00 130,319.85 10/06/01 10/05/01 06/15/01 15 9.75% 541.26 522.17 19.09 130,300.76 11/06/01 11/05/01 06/30/01 15 9.75% 522.10 522.10 0.00 130,300.76 11/06/01 11/05/01 07/19/01 19 9.50% 677.90 644.36 33.54 130,267.22 12/06/01 12/05/01 07/31/01 12 9.50% 406.86 406.86 0.00 130,267.22 12/06/01 12/05/01 08/23/01 23 9.50% 793.14 779.82 13.32 130,253.90 trustee payment 05/07/01 08/31/01 8 9.50% 271.21 271.21 0.00 130,253.90 trustee payment 05/07/01 09/05/01 5 9.25% 165.05 165.05 0.00 130,253.90 trustee payment 05/07/01 applied to NSF fee for 7/21/99 1.74 130,253.90 trustee payment 06/05/01 09/18/01 13 9.25% 429.12 429.12 0.00 130,253.90 trustee payment 06/05/01 applied to NSF fee for 7/21/99 8.88 130,253.90 trustee payment 07/20/01 09/23/01 5 9.25% 165.05 165.05 0.00 130,253.90 trustee payment 07/20/01 applied to NSF fee for 7/21/99 8.95 130,253.90 trustee payment 08/03/01 09/30/01 7 9.25% 231.07 231.07 0.00 130,253.90 trustee payment 08/03/01 10/31/01 31 8.75% 967.98 967.98 0.00 130,253.90 trustee payment 08/03/01 11/05/01 5 8.25% 147.20 147.20 0.00 130,253.90 trustee payment 08/20/01 applied to NSF fee for 7/21/99 22.50 130,253.90 trustee payment 09/24/01 applied to late charges 400.15 130,253.90 trustee payment 09/24/01 applied to NSF fee for 7/21/99 7.93 130,253.90 trustee payment 09/24/01 applied to NSF fee for 12/27/99 37.84 130,253.90 trustee payment 12/10/01 applied to late charges 421.40 130,253.90 trustee payment 12/10/01 applied to NSF fee for 12/27/99 12.16 130,253.90 trustee payment 12/10/01 applied to NSF fee for 09/19/2000 4.19 130,253.90 Trustee payments to be applied Payments that have been applied to late charges 1,041.30 821.55 to NSF fees 150.00 104.19 to term fee 75.00 0.00 to Access fees 924.88 0.00 to interest 5,607.52 2,376.68 ________ ________ 7.798.70 3.302.42