an insolvent debtor receives value by paying an old obligation. For this reason, making a preference in good faith is not a fraudulent conveyance because value is exchanged by the cancellation of the antecedent debt.”). 15 . 2002 WL 31412465, at *6. 16 . See Pereira v. Lady Hope Dress Co., Inc. (In re 550 Les Mouches Fashions, Ltd.), 24 B.R. 509, 516 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1982) (where, long before Kaplan Breslaw Ash, Judge Beatty held that securing an antecedent debt constitutes "value” for the debtor). As is apparent from the above, this Court’s determination is consistent with the uniform authority in this district. It is also consistent with the better reasoned cases elsewhere. See, e.g., Ris v. Society for Savings (In re Countdown of Connecticut, Inc.), 115 B.R. 18, 21 (Bankr.D.Conn.1990) (<HOLDING>); Abraham v. Central Trust Co. (In re Abraham),
holding company acted unreasonably by setting off debt after receiving notice of third partys security interest in same debt holding that the repayment of an antecedent debt constitutes fair consideration holding that a preexisting or antecedent debt may constitute sufficient consideration to support a mortgage holding that an antecedent debt constitutes value for the granting of a security interest and citing 550 les mouches fashions holding security interest in insurance premiums perfected by creation of security interest