Ive just reduced my hours to avoid an ipa , how will the OR react????

stintond

Is this dishonest?

Merry_Gentry

Wasn't that the whole point of the question you asked? And the responses you received which you haven't really responded to?

If you dropped overtime hours, that's one thing. But if you dropped from full time to part time purely to avoid an IPA then I would say that's verging on dishonest. But that's just my opinion. And I would imagine the OR wouldn't be very happy.

stintond

I dropped them yes ,but it was because I was sick of working long hours , I told the OR this.

Merry_Gentry

Ultimately it's between you and your OR - if s/he's happy with your actions, it doesn't really matter what anyone on here thinks does it

stintond

No , thanks anyway for the reply.

JCS1

I don't think they could do a BRO (unless you could consider dropping permament hours a potential disposal of an assert in the form of an IPA? might have to be prior to BR though?), but your examiner may stop any early discharge and also go through your SOA very thoroughly. Whilst the OR cannot make you work full time, they can put certain obstacles in the way to make your BR not as smooth as it might have been.

peachyprice

stintond wrote: »

What on earth are you talking about , this isnt what the criteria is for bros (irresponsible lending)this is what they are there for and what we pay the bankruptcy fee for , we inform them when our circumstances change.
It is ultimately down to me how many hours a week I work and nothing can overide that , they do not have the power to make you work X amount of hours.

I'm talking about your very first post, in which you implied you were cutting your hours purely to avoid an IPA. That is dishonest, and yes, could lead to a BRO if your OR really fancied it. BRO's aren't only for irresponsible borrowing you know.

You've only back tracked and said that isn't what you meant, and you'd only dropped overtime hours when you got flamed for being a complete plank.

crow

I thought the point of this site was to support people in their problems, not to criticise them? because their situation and the way rules apply to them allows them a different outcome than you make it unfair? That sounds like jealousy to me.

There is always the potential for unfairness in any rule, and there are always some people who do better in a situation that others. That doesn't mean it's fair to criticise them.

As an example. elsewhere on this site I've seen it recommended that if you are thinking of going bankrupt, don't pay creditors and save up the money for the fees. Is anyone going to say that that isn't fair because doing so reduces the profits the creditors make and you should keep on paying what you can until the debt is paid? ie, scrap bankruptcy altogther? If you want to say what someone does is unfair, well, is someone going bankrupt owing say £50k not being a more infair than someone who owes £10k?

Support not judge, lest you be judged. If you've gone/going bankrupt, then your'e not innocent either.

stintond

thanks Crow
the other point of course , my debts have been bought for pennies by debt collection companies ,I would be paying them , not the banks that lent the money in the first place , the ipo goes to the official recievers office too , not just the "creditors"
I regret borrowing and I want society to forgive me of my mistakes .
I use this forum for help and to help others too ,if people want to be nasty , ,well I will not respond in the same way , I will keep my dignity

dalip

We do support on this site but one thing we DO NOT do is encourage dishonesty. This poster diliberatly(sp) set out to incite trouble by " Ive just reduced my hours to avoid an ipa using this heading.


I am not sure what response this poster expected.