The end result from disallowance significantly less than § 502(b)(2) “is to try to guarantee one to loan providers except that [this new collector carrying the student loan] found their great amount of estate

nine Pick § 346.1 [ Student education loans ] § 158.2 Student loans. Get a hold of, age.grams., Leeper v. Pennsylvania Highest Educ. Guidance Agencies, 44 F.three-dimensional 98 (3d Cir. 1995) (Applying Bruning v. All of us, 376 You.S. 358, 84 S. Ct. 906, 11 L. Ed. 2d 772 (1964), unmatured postpetition interest to your a great nondischargeable education loan isn’t allowable and you may endures release in the a section thirteen situation.); During the lso are Hamilton, 179 B.R. 749 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1995) (Harmony out of student loan was nondischargeable on conclusion out-of money lower than Part thirteen package regardless of one to Agency off Degree failed so you’re able to punctual file an evidence of claim while the borrower submitted an evidence of claim with respect to the brand new Department for the an amount disputed by the Service.); Ridder v. Higher Ponds Highest Educ. Corp. (During the lso are Ridder), 171 B.Roentgen. 345, 346–47 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1994) (“Whether or not says to possess postpetition interest was disallowed during the bankruptcy proceeding, after personal bankruptcy the latest owner regarding good nondischargeable financial obligation could possibly get gather of the borrower personally. Bruning v. Us, 376 U.S. 358, 84 S. Ct. 906, eleven L. Ed. 2d 772 (1964). . . . Due to the fact financial obligation wasn’t discharged, High Lakes could possibly get collect the brand new postpetition focus off [the brand new borrower] truly. . . . The truth that Higher Lakes’ claim to possess postpetition interest would have come disallowed doesn’t have anything to do with if postpetition appeal was dischargeable.”); Within the re also Shelbayah, 165 B.Roentgen. 332 (Bankr. N.D. best payday loans Honea Path Ga. 1994) (Unmatured postpetition attract toward a student loan is not a permitted claim not as much as § 502(b)(2), and such as for instance attract continues to accrue for the Part 13 circumstances. ).

The unmatured postpetition notice are certain to get a similar nondischargeable reputation as the root education loan lower than § 1328(a)

ten Find less than inside area and find out §§ 155.dos [ Long-Term Expense ] § 88.nine Long-Title Bills, 159.step one [ A proposal: Much easier Statutes to own Classification away from Unsecured Says ] § A proposition: Smoother Statutes to own Category out of Unsecured Claims and 346.1 [ Figuratively speaking ] § 158.dos College loans. Look for, elizabeth.grams., Within the re also Williams, 253 B.Roentgen. 220, 232 (Bankr. W.D. Tenn. 2000) (“So it judge will not show Part thirteen arrangements that give for the fresh fee of interest so you can education loan financial institutions, not some other unsecured financial institutions.”); For the re also Shelbayah, 165 B.R. 332, 337 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1994) (Unmatured postpetition desire to your a student loan isn’t allowable within the a section 13 instance not as much as § 502(b)(2), eg interest will continue to accrue into the Part thirteen situation, plus the accruing appeal has the exact same nondischargeable character due to the fact root student loan lower than § 1328(a). ”). Accord Leeper v. Pennsylvania Highest Educ. Advice Agency, 44 F.three-dimensional 98 (3d Cir. 1995); Inside re also Hamilton, 179 B.R. 749 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1995); Ridder v. Higher Ponds Highest Educ. Corp. (From inside the lso are Ridder), 171 B.R. 345 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1994).

11 From inside the re also Boggan, 125 B.R. 533 (Bankr. Letter.D. Unwell. 1991). Accord Inside the re also Gregg, 179 B.R. 828, 830 (Bankr. Elizabeth.D. Tex. 1995) (Borrower can be by themselves identify three student loans to possess payment entirely in which other unsecured claim people could well be paid down simply .74%. “All student education loans in this case is actually nondischargeable around eleven You.S.C. § 523. Thus, a separate category of these states doesn’t unfairly discriminate facing another unsecured loan providers.”). See together with Within the lso are Dillon-Bader, 131 B.R. 463 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1991) (Inside framework of great-faith objection so you’re able to verification, this is simply not inappropriate having a section 13 debtor to alone identify Heal loans having one hundred% payment while spending other unsecured claim people 10% as the Fix financing have to be paid in complete pursuant so you can 42 U.S.C. § 294f(g).).