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
    • Darrenm325
    • By Darrenm325 28th Oct 17, 10:41 AM
    • 28Posts
    • 6Thanks
    Darrenm325
    Or wants money from family please help
    • #1
    • 28th Oct 17, 10:41 AM
    Or wants money from family please help 28th Oct 17 at 10:41 AM
    Could any one help please
    I was declared bankrucpt in Aug this year
    Last year sept 2016 I paid my dad Money that I owed him of 5 grad for money he let me over the years with my divorce and back street loan lenders who I was in real trouble with,
    When I filled the forms out and when I had my interview with the OR I did state this and the OR said my dad would have to write to conferm this was true to the OR
    Any way my dad has received a letter from Clark and Wilmot solisters asking him to pay them the money
    As you can imagine my dad has gone mental at me we have had a big fall out as he no longer has the money and says if they want the money then I will have to find it
    Some one please HELP
Page 2
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 31st Oct 17, 5:43 PM
    • 36,042 Posts
    • 152,232 Thanks
    silvercar
    Hi - me again

    That was always going to be the response from them to a phone call. And if you ring the OR they will just say to talk to CW.

    What he needs to do is send a letter, not saying he won't pay but that he can't pay, or at least can't pay all of it.

    It may be helpful if he can send a financial statement with it. As DD said they will be having to weigh up whether it is worth getting a court order against him. He may be able to get help from CAB or if you want we can have a look at the letter. PM one of us if there's identifiable detail in it.
    Originally posted by fatbelly
    I agree with this.

    DAD NEEDS TO SEND A LETTER.

    Requoting some of Debt Doctor's post:

    First response needs to be from dad saying that he doesn't have the money - or only has some of it. Repaying say, £1500 could well make the difference between recovery action or not, but in the first instance a letter stating that he doesn't have the money.


    I don't know dad's circumstances - does he own a house? Does he have a high income?


    Any letter should say that the money was lent and repaid in good faith, (possibly that bankruptcy was not being considered at the time) and that the money has been spent on normal household expenses.
    My bolding.
    • maxmycardagain
    • By maxmycardagain 31st Oct 17, 6:33 PM
    • 4,410 Posts
    • 3,677 Thanks
    maxmycardagain
    Q. What exactly can the IS do to collect money off dad?

    got me worried now...lol
    Instead of picking fault, pick up a life........ you might like it
    • fatbelly
    • By fatbelly 31st Oct 17, 7:11 PM
    • 11,512 Posts
    • 8,646 Thanks
    fatbelly
    Q. What exactly can the IS do to collect money off dad?

    got me worried now...lol
    Originally posted by maxmycardagain
    A county court judgement, followed by the usual court enforcement methods, including High Court. In excess of £5000 they could petition for HIS bankruptcy! But this is COULD, not WOULD.
    • Darrenm325
    • By Darrenm325 31st Oct 17, 8:26 PM
    • 28 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    Darrenm325
    Why did I not join this site years ago I have had a lot of help and advice I thank you all
    • maxmycardagain
    • By maxmycardagain 31st Oct 17, 8:55 PM
    • 4,410 Posts
    • 3,677 Thanks
    maxmycardagain
    A county court judgement, followed by the usual court enforcement methods, including High Court. In excess of £5000 they could petition for HIS bankruptcy! But this is COULD, not WOULD.
    Originally posted by fatbelly
    i have it on good authority theres no blood in a stone

    Instead of picking fault, pick up a life........ you might like it
    • Darrenm325
    • By Darrenm325 31st Oct 17, 9:57 PM
    • 28 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    Darrenm325
    Fatbelly
    [QUOTE=fatbelly;73340929]Hi - me again

    That was always going to be the response from them to a phone call. And if you ring the OR they will just say to talk to CW.

    What he needs to do is send a letter, not saying he won't pay but that he can't pay, or at least can't pay all of it.

    I have sent you a pm fatbelly 😃
    • Potbellypig
    • By Potbellypig 1st Nov 17, 1:22 PM
    • 149 Posts
    • 68 Thanks
    Potbellypig
    I have no advice on this, but it does cross my mind whilst reading this just how can your Dad be legally responsible for this.

    - person 1 owes person 2 money
    - person 1 pays person 2 money
    - person 1 goes bankrupt 11 months later
    - person 2 now legally responsible for paying that owed money back... ???

    Surely that isn't the case, is it?! I need a lie down...
    • Pricivius
    • By Pricivius 1st Nov 17, 1:34 PM
    • 584 Posts
    • 970 Thanks
    Pricivius
    I have no advice on this, but it does cross my mind whilst reading this just how can your Dad be legally responsible for this.

    - person 1 owes person 2 money
    - person 1 pays person 2 money
    - person 1 goes bankrupt 11 months later
    - person 2 now legally responsible for paying that owed money back... ???

    Surely that isn't the case, is it?! I need a lie down...
    Originally posted by Potbellypig


    Try it this way:


    - person 1 owes person 2 £5,000, person 3 £20,000, person 4, £10,000 and person 5 £5000
    - person 1 pays person 2 £5,000
    - person 1 goes bankrupt 11 months later


    It is my understanding that if it can be argued that person 1 knew he was insolvent at the time he paid person 2 as he had £40,000 of debt, and that he had a desire to put person 2 in a better position than he would otherwise have been as person 2 is his dad, then this is preferential payment and the OR can seek to restore the position to before the payment was made.


    Why should persons 3, 4 and 5 not receive a payment, whilst person 2 has his entire credit repaid? This is preferring a creditor.
    • Potbellypig
    • By Potbellypig 1st Nov 17, 2:33 PM
    • 149 Posts
    • 68 Thanks
    Potbellypig
    Try it this way:


    - person 1 owes person 2 £5,000, person 3 £20,000, person 4, £10,000 and person 5 £5000
    - person 1 pays person 2 £5,000
    - person 1 goes bankrupt 11 months later


    It is my understanding that if it can be argued that person 1 knew he was insolvent at the time he paid person 2 as he had £40,000 of debt, and that he had a desire to put person 2 in a better position than he would otherwise have been as person 2 is his dad, then this is preferential payment and the OR can seek to restore the position to before the payment was made.


    Why should persons 3, 4 and 5 not receive a payment, whilst person 2 has his entire credit repaid? This is preferring a creditor.
    Originally posted by Pricivius
    Yes but how does person 2 become legally responsible for paying that money back? If it is ruled that person 1 paid person 2 when he shouldn't have, surely that doesn't or shall I say shouldn't, fall back on person 2 over 11 months later.

    I suppose the time period is massively relevant in this instance.

    An interesting case though, I think.
    • StopIt
    • By StopIt 2nd Nov 17, 10:47 AM
    • 1,371 Posts
    • 1,167 Thanks
    StopIt
    Yes but how does person 2 become legally responsible for paying that money back? If it is ruled that person 1 paid person 2 when he shouldn't have, surely that doesn't or shall I say shouldn't, fall back on person 2 over 11 months later.

    I suppose the time period is massively relevant in this instance.

    An interesting case though, I think.
    Originally posted by Potbellypig

    Because from an insolvency point of view, the money wasn't person 1's to pay like that.


    If in debt like that, you pay pro rata (or contractual payments, of course), or not at all.


    Doing the above is literally taking money away from others.


    It sounds harsh to person 2, but it is person 1 that is being sanctioned. That money is legally recoverable, and yes, it'll be from the person who received it. You can't magic up another £5k from a person in BR, but that £5k in the OP example had to have gone somewhere.


    If recovering that money also puts person 2 in a crisis, they must seek help of their own, but from a legal point of view the OR is acting correctly in the interests of all creditors in a BR.


    Also to factor in here: If a person can just give all their cash to someone else before declaring bankruptcy and say they "owed" the money to the person, without a way to legally recover that sum it would be a system that would be abused in a heartbeat.
    Last edited by StopIt; 02-11-2017 at 10:49 AM.
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 2nd Nov 17, 11:40 AM
    • 36,042 Posts
    • 152,232 Thanks
    silvercar
    Also to factor in here: If a person can just give all their cash to someone else before declaring bankruptcy and say they "owed" the money to the person, without a way to legally recover that sum it would be a system that would be abused in a heartbeat.
    Which is why the financial situation of the bankrupt at the time they made the payment is crucial. If they were not insolvent at the time, then there is less justification in saying that the payment treated one person in preference to another.

    If recovering that money also puts person 2 in a crisis, they must seek help of their own, but from a legal point of view the OR is acting correctly in the interests of all creditors in a BR.
    There is little value in trying to extract money from someone who has none to spare. The idea of giving person 2 debt problems over a payment made a while ago is not beneficial to anyone.
    • StopIt
    • By StopIt 2nd Nov 17, 12:15 PM
    • 1,371 Posts
    • 1,167 Thanks
    StopIt
    Which is why the financial situation of the bankrupt at the time they made the payment is crucial. If they were not insolvent at the time, then there is less justification in saying that the payment treated one person in preference to another.


    There is little value in trying to extract money from someone who has none to spare. The idea of giving person 2 debt problems over a payment made a while ago is not beneficial to anyone.
    Originally posted by silvercar

    Of course there is not.


    However, someone facing insolvency could literally borrow to the hilt, give that cash to someone else a year or so before hitting the button and get away with it, if this mechanism didn't exist.


    As you said, if the money was repaid in good faith, prior to considering insolvency, that's a defence that'll satisfy an OR. If the person knew that they had no way to deal with these debts, but paid someone in preference, that would trigger this.


    In the OPs case, I don't think that they paid their dad in preference to the extent the OR thinks they did. That requires a level of intent I'm not seeing here. As you stated before, it needs defending properly.
    • Potbellypig
    • By Potbellypig 2nd Nov 17, 2:16 PM
    • 149 Posts
    • 68 Thanks
    Potbellypig
    Because from an insolvency point of view, the money wasn't person 1's to pay like that.


    If in debt like that, you pay pro rata (or contractual payments, of course), or not at all.


    Doing the above is literally taking money away from others.


    It sounds harsh to person 2, but it is person 1 that is being sanctioned. That money is legally recoverable, and yes, it'll be from the person who received it. You can't magic up another £5k from a person in BR, but that £5k in the OP example had to have gone somewhere.


    If recovering that money also puts person 2 in a crisis, they must seek help of their own, but from a legal point of view the OR is acting correctly in the interests of all creditors in a BR.


    Also to factor in here: If a person can just give all their cash to someone else before declaring bankruptcy and say they "owed" the money to the person, without a way to legally recover that sum it would be a system that would be abused in a heartbeat.
    Originally posted by StopIt
    Harsh to person 2?! That's an understatement.
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 2nd Nov 17, 5:49 PM
    • 36,042 Posts
    • 152,232 Thanks
    silvercar
    Harsh to person 2?! That's an understatement.
    Originally posted by Potbellypig
    We hear of ex-spouses to bankrupts being saddled with problems that weren't of their making, so bankruptcy doesn't only effect the bankrupt or the people living with them.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debate House Prices & the Economy, House Buying, Renting & Selling, Mortgages and Endowments, In My Home incl DIY, Overseas Holidays & Student boards.
    I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly.
    Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an abusive or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com. Any views are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.
    • Darrenm325
    • By Darrenm325 6th Nov 17, 1:47 PM
    • 28 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    Darrenm325
    You're not going to be able to 'find' money while you're in a bankruptcy.

    Your Dad has had a demand for 5k - if he cannot pay it then he needs to take advice about his own situation - he could try National Debtline or CAB for starters.

    The OR is following their internal guidelines - in their eyes you made a preferential payment to one creditor and they are seeking to get it back to distribute to all your creditors, after their fees.

    As this happened 11 months before your bankruptcy there is an argument that you did not know you were insolvent, had no intention of going bankrupt and your decision to repay this money was not an intention to 'prefer' your dad.

    However, 'Where the person who benefitted from the preference is a connected party or an associate, then it is presumed (unless the contrary can be shown) that the debtor was influenced by a desire to prefer '

    So this really depends on your Dad's own situation now as to how far the OR is going to push it - he needs advice.
    Originally posted by fatbelly

    Afternoon fat belly I have sent u a pm hope you had a good weekend
    • fatbelly
    • By fatbelly 6th Nov 17, 5:12 PM
    • 11,512 Posts
    • 8,646 Thanks
    fatbelly
    Afternoon fat belly I have sent u a pm hope you had a good weekend
    Originally posted by Darrenm325
    I've responded.
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