IMPORTANT! This is MoneySavingExpert's open forum - anyone can post

Please exercise caution & report any spam, illegal, offensive, racist, libellous post to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

  • Be nice to all MoneySavers
  • All the best tips go in the MoneySavingExpert weekly email

    Plus all the new guides, deals & loopholes

  • No spam/referral links
or Login with Facebook
Yet another IPA query
Reply
Views: 1,328
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
# 21
PippaGirl
Old 07-12-2012, 6:43 AM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,113
Default

Debt info was talking about if your regular income expenditure changed leaving no surplas in that instance which is totally different than the situation I was talking about of sudden one off expenses/costs and what then happens to an IPA.
"Our prime purpose in this life is to help others. And if you can't help them, at least don't hurt them." Dalai Lama
PippaGirl is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PippaGirl For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 22
sniggings
Old 07-12-2012, 6:20 PM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PippaGirl View Post
Debt info was talking about if your regular income expenditure changed leaving no surplas in that instance which is totally different than the situation I was talking about of sudden one off expenses/costs and what then happens to an IPA.
So your argument is if your allowed expenses go up you pay no less on your IPA? really fact is I quoted the insolvency services stance on this and they clearly say different to you, it quite clearly says an IPA can last for no more than 3 years but you think you know better and say it lass for 36 payments, sorry but you are wrong and you know it but for some unknow reason want to not admit it.

And as for debtinfo's posts, he has very clearly not agreed with you, as he knows your wrong here and I gave the correct advice but he is more willing to misrepresent the facts than to admit I'm correct, so he givese an "example" that has no bearing on the point at issue here, he is trying to confuse the argument by giving his example of if you don't pay the money owned on your IPA within the 3 years you will still have to pay it after 3 yeas so therefore an IPA can last more than 3 years please, of course you still owe the money if you choose not to pay, no one has said any different.

It's quite simple, if the OR allows a reduction in IPA it is for an allowed expense, if the expense is allowed then you do not have to pay the reduction in your IPA payment at a later date, as it was an allowed expense.

sniggings is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
# 23
Lou67
Old 07-12-2012, 10:34 PM
MoneySaving Stalwart
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Midlands
Posts: 726
Default

I have looked into this on several sites, and it seems that Sniggings is indeed correct. The period of time IS 3 years, and if an agreement IS made for you to miss a couple of months or so, because you cannot afford it for that particular period of time, as long as the non-payment has been agreed with the OR; you will NOT have to 'still pay the full 36 payments' and 'have it added on after the 3 years' as has been said on here.

So if you start your IPA in January 2013, and you miss out October and November 2013, after agreeing it with the OR, your IPA will still end in January 2016, and will not carry on until March 2016, to ensure it is still '36 payments' received. The IPA period is 3 years, and if you make only 33 payments in that period, it does not matter, as long as the OR has agreed to the missing payments,

I found this info out on the internet quite easily, but actually knew it already. I just looked up a link to back it up.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g...reements.htm#2

Click on number 2: How long does an IPA/IPO last? and pay particular attention to the paragraph that reads:


What happens if I miss a payment under my IPA or IPO? And particularly the last line (bolded)

It says...

"If you miss a payment, your trustee will ask you for an explanation and, where possible, arrange for you to pay the arrears over a short time. If the problem is more long term, such as a drop in your income or a necessary increase in your spending, the trustee will look at the situation again. If your trustee is satisfied that an IPA or IPO is no longer appropriate (for example because you have lost your job or your income has dropped) your trustee will tell you that payments will be suspended or reduced until the situation improves. If this happens, you must tell your trustee if things improve before the term of the IPA or IPO ends. If you can at any time restart the payments or increase them, the IPA or IPO will continue from that point. However, the agreement or order will end on the originally agreed date."


If you do not make payments and do not tell the OR, then of course that is a different matter, and you can get into trouble of course, and the Courts will probably chase you for the money, unless you have a damn good reason for not paying. But yes, if you have agreed with the OR to miss out several months because of a lower income or essential outgoings you were not expecting, they will not add those months on at the end of the 3 years.

It's also on this link from the Insolvency Service

http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency/per...d-agreements#3

So yes, what Sniggings has said IS correct.
Lou67 is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following User Says Thank You to Lou67 For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 24
coolcait
Old 08-12-2012, 12:18 AM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,679
Default

Glad the OP's problem was sorted out.

The IPA discussion is interesting. In language terms alone, there is a difference between 'vary' and 'suspend'.

In practical terms, there is a difference between being unable to make a payment because your income has decreased/regular outgoings have increased, and being unable to pay it because you have had a one-off, unexpected, unbudgeted expense.

In real-life terms, there are nuances and pragmatism. That can mean the difference between an OR/Trustee saying:

"You've got a big repair bill this month, and you can't afford to pay it AND your IPA? Well, you'll have to pay for the repairs once you've saved it up - that's not grounds for suspending/reducing or varying your IPA. And if you don't pay your IPA, I may apply to the court for an order suspending your discharge from bankruptcy AND I can take steps to recover the money you owe"

or

"OK, I can't change the IPA to let you pay for the repairs, and I can't say that you're OK to miss this month's payments. But, if you can agree to make up the missed payment during the course of your IPA, or pay it at the end, we can probably sort it out".

Despite all the posturing on the thread, the fact is that you're probably all correct to one extent or another.

The OR probably could insist that all payments are made on time, and that any unexpected repair bills are the bankrupt person's own problem - and this way all payments would be made within the three year period. And any failure to pay could lead to the consequences already mentioned.

Alternatively, the OR could take a more pragmatic and sympathetic approach, and agree that the person could pay the arrears over a short time - even if that was a couple of months after the three year period.

Anecdotal evidence from this board, and others, suggests that the OR will take the alternative, pragmatic and sympathetic approach.

Personally, I prefer that approach. And I think that it would be a great shame if it were to be lost.
coolcait is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to coolcait For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 25
sniggings
Old 08-12-2012, 1:01 AM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcait View Post
Glad the OP's problem was sorted out.

The IPA discussion is interesting. In language terms alone, there is a difference between 'vary' and 'suspend'.

In practical terms, there is a difference between being unable to make a payment because your income has decreased/regular outgoings have increased, and being unable to pay it because you have had a one-off, unexpected, unbudgeted expense.

In real-life terms, there are nuances and pragmatism. That can mean the difference between an OR/Trustee saying:

"You've got a big repair bill this month, and you can't afford to pay it AND your IPA? Well, you'll have to pay for the repairs once you've saved it up - that's not grounds for suspending/reducing or varying your IPA. And if you don't pay your IPA, I may apply to the court for an order suspending your discharge from bankruptcy AND I can take steps to recover the money you owe"

or

"OK, I can't change the IPA to let you pay for the repairs, and I can't say that you're OK to miss this month's payments. But, if you can agree to make up the missed payment during the course of your IPA, or pay it at the end, we can probably sort it out".

Despite all the posturing on the thread, the fact is that you're probably all correct to one extent or another.

The OR probably could insist that all payments are made on time, and that any unexpected repair bills are the bankrupt person's own problem - and this way all payments would be made within the three year period. And any failure to pay could lead to the consequences already mentioned.

Alternatively, the OR could take a more pragmatic and sympathetic approach, and agree that the person could pay the arrears over a short time - even if that was a couple of months after the three year period.

Anecdotal evidence from this board, and others, suggests that the OR will take the alternative, pragmatic and sympathetic approach.

Personally, I prefer that approach. And I think that it would be a great shame if it were to be lost.

a late payment, needs to be paid back, a suspended or reduced IPA does not.

if your OR says it's ok to be late with your payments then of course you still owe that money and need to make the payments up at a later time, we were not taking about late payments though were we!

sniggings is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following User Says Thank You to sniggings For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 26
coolcait
Old 08-12-2012, 1:56 AM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniggings View Post
a late payment, needs to be paid back, a suspended or reduced IPA does not.

if your OR says it's ok to be late with your payments then of course you still owe that money and need to make the payments up at a later time, we were not taking about late payments though were we!
I'm not sure to whom you are referring when you say 'we'.

My view, and my position, is set out in the post you have quoted. And I think that your post endorses what I said.

I was talking about 'missed' payments. Although the term 'late' payments probably applies too. Instances where the OR could have said "Tough! You need to pay your IPA". But, instead, said "OK. You can make that IPA payment late(r)".

Some examples of missed/late payments might be:

"unsual expenses such as repairs to a car" - post 6

"if you have some financial need some as car repairs, washing machine breaking and needing a new one etc." - post 8

"the IPA isn't officially suspended, instead you can miss payments for one or two months or however long when you need the finances to pay for unexpected needs and then you can pay the missed payments after the IPA has ended" - post 14

These are not 'suspended' payments - as in cases where there is a short term change in circumstances and/or reduction in disposable income.

They are not ' reduced' or 'varied' payments - as in cases where there is a longer term change in circumstances and/or reduction in disposable income.

These are cases where the bankrupt person has to meet an unexpected bill. Their disposable income hasn't changed.

The person needs to miss a payment to their IPA, in order to pay the bill. Or, they need to put the repairs on hold until they've saved up enough to pay.

So, as you point out, if the OR says that it's OK for 'you' (the bankrupt person) to make that payment late(r), then "of course you still owe that money and need to make the payments up at a later time".
coolcait is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to coolcait For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 27
PippaGirl
Old 08-12-2012, 7:46 AM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,113
Default

Thank you coolcait, you were saying exactly what I was saying too, and I too was always talking about missed payments due to expenditure and I too have seen many cases on this board where the OR has indeed excepted those missed payments after the IPA has ended, so the BR person has continued to pay the monthly installments beyond 36 months of the start of the IPA.
"Our prime purpose in this life is to help others. And if you can't help them, at least don't hurt them." Dalai Lama
PippaGirl is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PippaGirl For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 28
dojoman
Old 08-12-2012, 8:55 AM
Deliciously Dedicated Diehard MoneySaving Devotee
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wouldn`t you like to know!
Posts: 10,904
Default

I see my post has been removed again but to be honest it does not surprise me Anyway wall, head, banging now springs to mind

Let us see how long this post lasts??????
B&SC No. 298
Life`s Tragedy is that we get OLD too soon
and WISE too late!
dojoman is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dojoman For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 29
alastairq
Old 08-12-2012, 9:53 AM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,158
Default

Lou67's quote is pretty much exactly what DI said.

I don't understand the argument here?


As has been mentioned by DI, on application to the OR, a BR, [faced with a sudden expense] can ask for a 'payment holiday'...a suspension.


If the OR decides said expense comes at a time within the IPA period, that the BR could not have reasonably saved for it from the allowances, then the IPA can be suspended to alleviate cash-flow...but is resumed for the remaining period.

If.. the OR decides that the expense should have already been allowed for on the SOA,[ but wasn't] they can vary/reduce the IPA payments for the remaining period. [i.e..... agrees a revised SOA, reducing any surplus]

In the former case, the payments period is for 36 months.
[BR can afford it from allowances, but not at that moment in time]

In the latter case, the payment period ceases at 36 months from inception.
[BR could never afford it given the existing levels of allowances]


I , personally, went through something similar., regarding payment periods.

I had a NT IPA.

My tax code was changed come the new tax year.

However, due to overtime payments, Moonbeever had yet to calculate the additional sums I still needed to pay.

So, I was still paying my NT IPA three months after the new tax year....3 months after my tax code had changed.

[But, only the surplus I 'owed' from Jan, Feb & March]
No, I don't think all other drivers are idiots......but some are determined to change my mind.......

Last edited by alastairq; 08-12-2012 at 9:55 AM.
alastairq is online now
Reply With Quote Report Post
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to alastairq For This Useful Post: Show me >>
# 30
sniggings
Old 08-12-2012, 4:56 PM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alastairq View Post
Lou67's quote is pretty much exactly what DI said.

I don't understand the argument here?


As has been mentioned by DI, on application to the OR, a BR, [faced with a sudden expense] can ask for a 'payment holiday'...a suspension.


If the OR decides said expense comes at a time within the IPA period, that the BR could not have reasonably saved for it from the allowances, then the IPA can be suspended to alleviate cash-flow...but is resumed for the remaining period.

If.. the OR decides that the expense should have already been allowed for on the SOA,[ but wasn't] they can vary/reduce the IPA payments for the remaining period. [i.e..... agrees a revised SOA, reducing any surplus]

In the former case, the payments period is for 36 months.
[BR can afford it from allowances, but not at that moment in time]

In the latter case, the payment period ceases at 36 months from inception.
[BR could never afford it given the existing levels of allowances]


I , personally, went through something similar., regarding payment periods.

I had a NT IPA.

My tax code was changed come the new tax year.

However, due to overtime payments, Moonbeever had yet to calculate the additional sums I still needed to pay.

So, I was still paying my NT IPA three months after the new tax year....3 months after my tax code had changed.
to now say she was talking about late payments
[But, only the surplus I 'owed' from Jan, Feb & March]

it start with the post pippagirl made, saying if you have extra car expenses and if your IPA was suspend you would have to make those payments up, I say that if the OR agrees to a reduced IPA for those reasons then it will not have to be made up late, as it's an allowed expense, all reasonable expenses are allowed on an IPA so car repairs would be included in that. pippagirl is now trying to change the argument as she knows shes wrong, to late payments, but as she clearly said in her post, extra car expenses, she is being disingenuous to now say she was speaking about late payments.

to sum up, all late payments need making up, all allowed expenses don't, it's all very simple really.

sniggings is offline
Reply With Quote Report Post
Reply

Bookmarks
 
 




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 Forum Jump  

Contact Us - MoneySavingExpert.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 7:30 PM.

 Forum Jump  

Free MoneySaving Email

Top deals: Week of 16 April 2014

Get all this & more in MoneySavingExpert's weekly email full of guides, vouchers and Deals

GET THIS FREE WEEKLY EMAIL Full of deals, guides & it's spam free

Latest News & Blogs

Martin's Twitter Feed

profile
  • RT @MoneySavingExp: Weekly email:Free breaking bad, top shares ISA, HOT bband deal ending, 2.5% cash ISA, Tesco wine sale, £10 champers.. h?
  • RT @MoneySavingExp: Ovivo closure: MSE?s reported the mobile firm to authorities. If you?ve been affected, here?s how you can complain http?
  • Right switching off Twitter now. Going back offline. Thanks to those of both sides tweets for making it a more enjoyable watch.

Cheap Travel Money

Find the best online rate for holiday cash with MSE's TravelMoneyMax.

Find the best online rate for your holiday cash with MoneySavingExpert's TravelMoneyMax.

TuneChecker Top Albums

  • VARIOUS ARTISTSNOW THAT'S WHAT I CALL MUSIC! 87
  • VARIOUS ARTISTSFROZEN (ORIGINAL MOTION PICTURE SOUNDTRACK)
  • VARIOUS ARTISTSULTIMATE CLUB ANTHEMS

MSE's Twitter Feed

profile
Always remember anyone can post on the MSE forums, so it can be very different from our opinion.
We use Skimlinks and other affiliated links in some of our boards, for some of our users.