Opinion ID: 780391
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Analysis of Bankruptcy Court's Factual Determination of Appropriate Rate

Text: 34 Having reviewed de novo, and concurred in, the bankruptcy court's decision to examine conventional interest rates in setting the appropriate present value of Household's secured claim, we must now apply the more deferential clear error standard in determining whether the bankruptcy judge's selection of a 10.3% interest rate was proper. 35 At the evidentiary hearing conducted by the bankruptcy court, testimony was offered that even Household, an admitted sub-prime lender with much higher interest rates than could otherwise be obtained, offered loans at rates as low as 10.95%. Even more germane to the bankruptcy court's final determination, however, was the testimony of a local bank officer who surmised that the weighted average of all conventional car loans in the area was 9.3%. Finally, evidence was adduced that only occasionally were objections filed to plans calling for 8% interest rates on automobile loans, [t]en and ten and a half don't draw that many objections[,][e]leven rarely does and twelve almost never. In light of such information, and considering the fact that no objection was voiced to the finding that interest rates in the relevant vicinity had recently risen, the bankruptcy judge was not clearly erroneous in setting a 10.3% interest rate as a current conventional rate on consumer automobile loans. 2