Once again, I sat in a 341 meeting where the trustee purported to deliver vital information to the assembled debtors. She had a captive audience of anxious listeners. She had ostensible power of life and death over their financial future. They needed to know what she had to say. But as communication, it failed. Badly. For utterly avoidable reasons. The delivery was rushed, mumbled, and monotone. The word choice was ill suited for an audience unfamiliar with bankruptcy. I doubt one in ten absorbed the message. Examination under oath The experience that triggered this rant involved a client who superficially spoke English, but not well enough to catch precise meanings in her second language. We opted for an interpreter so that we were as sure as you can be that the debtor understood the question. And yet, the trustee's counsel asked long, involved questions in the alternative. The form of the questions had the interpreter struggling, I think. Certainly, … [Continue reading...]
