Execeptable expediture

debt_doctor

nervousmother wrote: »

Thanks for that debt doctor, I have read this before but I am confused. does the above mean that unless your disabled you should not be allowed holiday?
The reason I ask is my Trustee although has not set the ipa yet scribbled out the holiday part on our SOA. Meaning he was not to allow a holiday..
My OH is disabled, but he does work bringing in more income than me, but do you think we could fight to have a holiday included in our SOA?

Hi,

It means that anyone, irrespective of being disabled or not, is entitled to 'a break from routine' and that such a fund should be allowed based on £20 pp pm.I would challenge any IPA that did not include a holiday provision unless I thought the OR had been extremely generous in other areas.

DD

fermi

nervousmother wrote: »

The reason I ask is my Trustee although has not set the ipa yet scribbled out the holiday part on our SOA. Meaning he was not to allow a holiday..

An external trustee is not obliged to follow those guidelines.

But think of it this way, If you challenged the decison (as is your right) in court then why should you be disadvantaged just because your case is being handled by an external IP?

Not saying you should challenge, but food for thought.

nervousmother

Thanks for that guys, I feel this is a future fight. We are a family of 5 so I assume that would mean £100 pm for holls? nice... at the moment we are fighting over the BI in our home.
The next fight will be the SOA as he scribbled out the holls allowance & scribbled out the amount of £5pm per child for activities, this I know is allowed and my kids DO use it, one has violin lessons, another a member of girl guides and the third does kick boxing. All costing about £5 per wk each so it works expensive over a month (£65)

debt_doctor

It is true that the guidance is from the insolvency service technical manual, however it is this guidance and the legislation behind it that would be used in any court challenge to decide an IPO.

Under the enterprise act all bankrupts should be left with sufficient funds for the reasonable domestic needs of themselves and their family. The manual describes a modest holiday as "a reasonable domestic need".

On the basis of that I would not treat an IP, external trustee, or the OR any different to each other. If your not happy, dont sign.

DD

fermi

Saying what I did in a previous post, remeber that even with the OR some expendireure items are "discretionary".

It really is a hard balance to strike.

Fight. But pick you fights wisely.

fermi

debt_doctor wrote: »

It is true that the guidance is from the insolvency service technical manual, however it is this guidance and the legislation behind it that would be used in any court challenge to decide an IPO.

Unfortunately what is defined as "reasonable" is not explained in the legislation.

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree. As I said an IP should be treated the same as the OR. Otherwise would be unfair.

But you need to think carefully before you challenge.

debt_doctor

fermi wrote: »

Unfortunately what is defined as "reasonable" is not explained in the legislation.

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree. As I said an IP should be treated the same as the OR. Otherwise would be unfair.

But you need to think carefully before you challenge.

Agreed Fermi, you should always think carefully before you challenge the decision of any 'official body' bearing in mind the powers they have. As I said earlier, I would challenge any IPA that, for instance, does not include a modest holiday unless the IPA was over generous in other areas which may be reduced by an IPO.

In general terms I think bankrupts should stand up and demand to have their 'reasonable domestic needs 'met as the legislation requires, and it is only by challenging that the permitted needs will ever become more favourable.

However, Fermi's last line above is an important one, as the trustee is currently dealing with your house.

Should that discourage you from fighting an unfair IPA

Hmmmm........

DD

nervousmother

I am hoping the house will be sorted well before any IPA is set up.

The problem I have regarding our house is that we had a chartered Surveyor do a valuation on it, it came back at about £155k. A house same as ours recently sold for £130k (last wk) The Trustee had a 'drive by' valuation done and it came back at £169k. We were origionally happy with the surveyor valuation done in feb i think if we got a reduction for legal fees and early redemption, The trustee wants us to make an offer based on his valuation. I think that is unreasonable as it bears no relation to figures in this area. His valuer is not even based in this area. some 30 miles away.
MIL has called local estate agents who say the house would need to be marketed at anywhere between 120-130 to get a quick sale. Our mortgage is 142.
The other fight I have is due to my car. No doubt it is needed for work. No car No job. The trustee wants me to make a offer to him for me to keep it. It is valued at 1.5k so i dont understand why i need to make an offer.

fiveyearplan

Sounds like you are having a hard time NM. Happy Mother's Day!

nervousmother

That what does not kill us makes us stronger:D

In other words if i dont 'top' myslef i will become a hard faced Bi*tch