At least 2 out of 3 people declared bankrupt are not home owners.

fc123

silvercar wrote: »

Generalising, but you get a BRU if the OR decides you have enough disposable income to pay back some money to your creditors. You get a BRO if the OR decides you are not being honest with them, have deliberately wasted money you knowingly couldn't pay or are a gambler.



.

Here's details of a 10 yr BRO....courtesy of nervousmother off the BR board.

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/databases/ddirector/viewbrobrudetailsmore.asp?courtnumber=0506702008

Dorset high flier went BR for 8 million recently.

Was living it large a few years back. Link

dopester

fc123 wrote: »

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/databases/ddirector/viewbrobrudetailsmore.asp?courtnumber=0506702008

After reading that, I don't think a 10 year bankruptcy order is tough enough a deterrent for people like him disposing of his remaining wealth in to friendly hands. :mad:

fc123

dopester wrote: »

After reading that, I don't think a 10 year bankruptcy order is tough enough a deterrent for people like him disposing of his remaining wealth in to friendly hands. :mad:

And this is the problem. The Insolvency report sounds like it was a run of bad luck/business problem (which could be fair enough) but then out and out fraud as he hid the cash.

I have to say, the above are rare but I would have thought a criminal conviction would be in order....but proving it is the problem, I guess, and the cost to the taxpayer.

CLAPTON

In bankruptcy it is often possible to retain the house


- the OR (official Receiver) will try to realise any value in the house i.e. if the value of the house is more than the mortgage and secured loans they will wish to sell and so gain some money for the benefit of the creditors.

However, if a family friend or relative is willing to give the OR the equity in the house then usually the OR will not force the sale (a lot of trouble and expense for the OR with no guarentee how long it will take or how much it will raise.)


So the bankrupt will retain the house and continue paying the mnortgage.

This is particular common at the moment will many houses in either negative or very little equity but the principle applies to any property.

mbga9pgf

Really2 wrote: »

Just looking at the credit action stats.

One person is declared bankrupt every 3.97 minutes

A house is repossessed every 11.5 minuets.

Using a very flawed and basic calculation that means around 2 in every 3 bankrupt people are not home owners (as bankruptcy would result in a repo)

It is likely to be more than that as all repos are not through bankruptcy.


Looks like house owners were not the only "debt junkies".

Just highlights the complete tidal wave we face once the mortgage support schemes lapse actually.Your asumption that "bankruptcy would result in a repo" is a flawed one; secured vs unsecured lending, unprotected lending vs state supported mortgages. 30% cuts in the NHS, 25% cuts in defence, one of these days the chickens will come home to roost for all those homeowners that my taxes are paying mortgage interest off at the mo. Its going to flood the market with properties, wait and see..

Really2

mbga9pgf wrote: »

.Your asumption that "bankruptcy would result in a repo" is a flawed one; secured vs unsecured lending, unprotected lending vs state supported mortgages.

Wow, no getting past you is there. Anyone would think I wrote something like that in the first post.

Really2 wrote: »

Using a very flawed and basic calculation .

mbga9pgf

Really2 wrote: »

Wow, no getting past you is there. Anyone would think I wrote something like that in the first post.

Kind of defeats the whole point of the original point then if the argument is flawed then surely?

Really2

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Kind of defeats the whole point of the original point then if the argument is flawed then surely?

Indeed, it was to cause debate and simply point out people are in debt up to their eyes not just home owners