Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • childofbaahl
    • By childofbaahl 5th Nov 17, 2:18 AM
    • 57Posts
    • 18Thanks
    childofbaahl
    Money received whilst DRO was still active - Any effect now DRO has completed?
    • #1
    • 5th Nov 17, 2:18 AM
    Money received whilst DRO was still active - Any effect now DRO has completed? 5th Nov 17 at 2:18 AM
    Hi everyone,
    I had a question regarding a DRO that a family member had in effect last year. They received money from a probate whilst under the DRO and neglected to mention it to either the administrator of the probate or the DRO people themselves. The DRO has since lapsed and I was wondering if there was anything that could be done about this? If the DRO people were contacted and provided with evidence to show that the DRO was breached whilst still in effect would they be able to come after the person in question now that it has completed? I believe that the family member deliberately mislead the administrators and the DRO people.


    As an aside, now that the administrators of the probate are aware of the DRO are they obligated to mention this turn of events to the DRO people? I had heard that the person who provided the money could be liable for future debts but that doesn't sound right?


    Thank you in advance for any and all comments.
Page 1
    • fatbelly
    • By fatbelly 5th Nov 17, 8:42 AM
    • 11,512 Posts
    • 8,646 Thanks
    fatbelly
    • #2
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:42 AM
    • #2
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:42 AM
    OK - I read you other thread so can see the background to this and I am assuming that when you say 'lapsed' you mean that the DRO completed, not that it was revoked.

    The responsibility to inform the Official Receiver lies solely with the debtor. The executor can never be responsible for a beneficiary's debts, short of a court order to that effect..

    There can be some debate about when a lump sum became 'quantified' but if it was received within the moratorium period there is no debate, and if the sum is over £1990 there is only one option under the rules, which is that the DRO must be revoked.

    DROs can be, and in this case would be, revoked retrospectively.

    In addition, the conduct of the debtor would be considered for prosecution. It would definitely be an 'offence' under the Insolvency Act but actual prosecutions seem to be saved for the most serious cases.
    Last edited by fatbelly; 05-11-2017 at 8:49 AM.
    • fatbelly
    • By fatbelly 5th Nov 17, 8:48 AM
    • 11,512 Posts
    • 8,646 Thanks
    fatbelly
    • #3
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:48 AM
    • #3
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:48 AM
    FYI the record of a DRO completing only stays on the register for 3 months after it completes. If you need evidence and are in that period, take a print now.
    • glentoran99
    • By glentoran99 5th Nov 17, 8:49 AM
    • 4,794 Posts
    • 3,811 Thanks
    glentoran99
    • #4
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:49 AM
    • #4
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:49 AM
    So the question is, if you go and report them will you get it revoked on them?


    Nice relation....
    • fatbelly
    • By fatbelly 5th Nov 17, 8:52 AM
    • 11,512 Posts
    • 8,646 Thanks
    fatbelly
    • #5
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:52 AM
    • #5
    • 5th Nov 17, 8:52 AM
    So the question is, if you go and report them will you get it revoked on them?


    Nice relation....
    Originally posted by glentoran99
    Read the other thread.
    • childofbaahl
    • By childofbaahl 6th Nov 17, 5:21 AM
    • 57 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    childofbaahl
    • #6
    • 6th Nov 17, 5:21 AM
    • #6
    • 6th Nov 17, 5:21 AM
    I made a copy of the DRO when I found out about it, after the advance was made but before it completed - I would never have thought to check the insolvency register if not for a solicitor friend suggesting it. I would not be considering this course of action if not for the extensive and pervasive history of debt and exponential stress they have caused the rest of the family. This kind of attitude and decision has been their bedrock and affected us all in some form or another and continues to this day.


    Glentoran99 = This is not something that I would do lightly and will take serious consideration before any action is taken, I understand the impact this could have on their life and as such would give that decision the weight and time it requires. But what it comes down to is greed, they knew that the small advance they received was in contravention to the DRO so they should have waited the 3 months until the DRO completed but she wanted that money there and then, regardless of the consequences.


    Fatbelly = If I were to choose that path who would I contact? I'm assuming the insolvency team details on the DRO notice itself? I have a copy of the DRO printed from the insolvency register and I can provide a copy of the cheque and executor's account to show the date it was drawn / deposited. Would I need anything else? Thank you again for your help & candour in this matter.
    • fatbelly
    • By fatbelly 6th Nov 17, 8:00 AM
    • 11,512 Posts
    • 8,646 Thanks
    fatbelly
    • #7
    • 6th Nov 17, 8:00 AM
    • #7
    • 6th Nov 17, 8:00 AM
    Yes, any branch of the insolvency service but ideally the DRO team in Plymouth, as that is where it would end up.

    If wouldn't necessarily have saved her DRO by delaying payment. If the amount was capable of being determined as over 1k, then there was a legal duty to inform them. Though as I mentioned before, it's only over £1990 that it has to be revoked and the DRO team has discretion between £1000 - £1990
    • childofbaahl
    • By childofbaahl 6th Nov 17, 4:45 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    childofbaahl
    • #8
    • 6th Nov 17, 4:45 PM
    • #8
    • 6th Nov 17, 4:45 PM
    So just knowing that in the near future she would receive over £1,000 from an estate, even if that money would have come outside the DRO moratorium, she would still be obligated to inform them?

    That is an interesting point as for the majority of the probate she thought she would be receiving over 100x that sum and knew exactly what she would be getting and received from the estate 5 months before the end of the DRO. That sum was over the £1990 threshold and that information was made known to her through her solicitor, who I'm also assuming she didn't inform about the DRO. After the estate she also knew what monies she would be receiving from a split on our house 6 weeks before the end of the DRO, it was 'capable of being determined' as over the threshold for the majority of her DRO year but received that 7 months after the moratorium ended.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,135Posts Today

6,664Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I believe I can boldly go where no twitter poll has gone before https://t.co/HA0jC92gAK

  • OK I'm wilting to public pressure and there will be a star trek captain's poll at some point next week

  • I can get that. My order is 1. Picard 2. Janeway 3. Kirk. Too early to say where Lorca will end up (or would you? https://t.co/kawtCOe9RA

  • Follow Martin