In re Terry, 505 B.R. 660

Tax sale of the Property occurred September 19, 2012; Movant purchased and paid $120,000.
Tax Deed conveying the Property to Movant was recorded January 5, 2013; Ejectment Action filed January 10, 2013.
Debtor filed Chapter 13 on May 30, 2013, staying the Ejectment Action.
Original Order (August 14, 2013) held Debtor had an unexpired right to redeem; continued hearing set for September 19, 2013.
Debtor’s Plan (June 13, 2013) proposes $135,000 to Movant: $60,000 lump sum by May 1, 2014 and sixty monthly payments of $1,250.
Movant argues Debtor’s redemption right cannot be satisfied over the Plan; Court addresses whether §1322(b) can modify Movant’s rights.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether §1322(b) can modify Movant’s redemption rights.	Movant argues no modification under §1322(b).	Debtor argues §1322(b) may modify Movant’s claim to allow payments over the Plan.	Yes; Movant’s claim can be modified under §1322(b).
Whether redemption under 53 P.S. §7293 can extend beyond the redemption period via the Plan.	Movant contends absolute deadline; cannot stretch timing under Plan.	Debtor contends Plan can extend payment within §1322(b) framework.	Plan can extend payment while preserving redemption rights.
Whether Movant is the holder of a claim enforceable in bankruptcy.	Movant argues no claim against Debtor; merely a state remedy.	Debtor contends Movant holds a claim as of Petition Date and may be paid through Plan.	Movant is the holder of a claim that may be modified under §1322(b).

In re Hammond, 420 B.R. 633 (Bankr.W.D.Pa.2009) (purchaser holds inchoate, defeasible rights until redemption period expires; plan may address the redemption amount under §1322(b))
In re Francis, 489 B.R. 262 (Bankr.N.D.Ga.2013) (Georgia law analogue; debtor’s rights and purchaser’s claim may be resolved by monetary terms under bankruptcy plan)
In re Rugroden, 481 B.R. 69 (Bankr.N.D.Cal.2012) (discusses §108(b) extension versus plan-based redemption timing)