How far do they go?

DejaVu_3

I'm taking advice about entering a trust deed. I'm just at the start of the process and will certainly be taking possibilities such as DAS into consideration as well. I'm sorry if this sounds like a dubious question but I have a car, which is a 51 plate with no finance on it. The thing I am worried about losing is my bike. It is quite an old bike but I know that it is a luxury really, it also has no finance on it. If I don't tell the trustee about it is there a way they can find out that I am lying about having an asset. I don't want to get into trouble with the trustee. Do they contact the DVLA to ask about what vehicles you own?

MIVAA

Hi DejaVu,

I have a question for you.

How do you feel about the idea of breaking the law?

Is it OK so long as nobody finds out?

When you sign a Trust Deed you sign a legal document - which is a sworn statement of truth. All your assets should be listed, and it's as simple as that.

So perhaps you should be looking at alternative options which enable you to keep the bike, rather than non-disclosure.


MIVAA

DejaVu_3

Hi MIVAA

Thank you for your forthright reply. The reason I posted here is that I have no one else to talk to. Of course I would not want to break the law and I hope that the fact that I posted here on a public forum shows that. I had my first meeting yesterday and I detailed all of my many, many debts and also my few assets. I would never want to break the law nor to encourage anyone else to do that. However when I give consideration to how many times I told the credit card companies I could afford the debt they were allowing me perhaps I am already that type of person as I lied on 54,000 occasions! If the new restrictions on lending go through I forsee a few more liars out they, I will try very hard to avoid being one of them.

Best wishes, DejaVu

Charco_2

Perhaps MIVAA was a little harsh but the sentiment is the same. It is a legal document and what you would be doing is called fraud.

As an alternative to this, is there any reason you can think of that would make it make sense to your creditors that you keeping your bike is a good idea... (were you on here before to ask this question?)

m_13

Under Fraud Act 2006:

Section 3: Fraud by failing to disclose information
18. Section 3 makes it an offence to commit fraud by failing to disclose information to another person where there is a legal duty to disclose the information. A legal duty to disclose information may include duties under oral contracts as well as written contracts. The concept of "legal duty" is explained in the Law Commission's Report on Fraud, which said at paragraphs 7.28 and 7.29:

"7.28 ..Such a duty may derive from statute (such as the provisions governing company prospectuses), from the fact that the transaction in question is one of the utmost good faith (such as a contract of insurance), from the express or implied terms of a contract, from the custom of a particular trade or market, or from the existence of a fiduciary relationship between the parties (such as that of agent and principal).

7.29 For this purpose there is a legal duty to disclose information not only if the defendant's failure to disclose it gives the victim a cause of action for damages, but also if the law gives the victim a right to set aside any change in his or her legal position to which he or she may consent as a result of the non-disclosure. For example, a person in a fiduciary position has a duty to disclose material information when entering into a contract with his or her beneficiary, in the sense that a failure to make such disclosure will entitle the beneficiary to rescind the contract and to reclaim any property transferred under it."

19. For example, the failure of a solicitor to share vital information with a client within the context of their work relationship, in order to perpetrate a fraud upon that client, would be covered by this section. Similarly, an offence could be committed under this section if a person intentionally failed to disclose information relating to his heart condition when making an application for life insurance.

I wouldn't even get involved in this. Whilst you might want to keep your bike, is it worth a criminal record?

DejaVu_3

Hi Charco

No, I have not asked this question before but I think there is a post where a guy was asking if he would be able to keep his bike when he also had a car, the upshot was he did keep it, although it was still unclear, under the rules, why he was able to do this.

Can I just reiterate that I have already mentioned all my assets, car, bike and house at my initial meeting and would never intentionally commit a fraud. But I have spent hours reading this Forum, looking for information and there is obviously tons of it out there, all great. However I have noticed something interesting, on another forum entirely, which made me ask the question really. Some chaps have had a really big income and, if they have no car on h.p to declare, they only have some sort of old banger! What went through my mind was this, do some, very rare and dispicable individuals actually have TWO cars not on h.p. One a run around and one decent one.... and how far would the IP go to find out. It was just a thought and in no way a suggestion.

Actually I have had enough worries with my inability to pay my debts to commit fraud to hold onto a £500 bike!

Yours in puzzlement, Deja Vu!

DejaVu_3

Absolutely, M_13,

Charco_2

The reason he was able to keep the bike was because he was able to show his IP/Creditors that by keeping the bike he could produce the same (or better) dividend for his creditors... the bike was less expensive to run than the car (saving him £60 a month in petrol) but he needed the car occassionally for work deliveries etc... the sale of the assets would have brought in a few £grand but would have meant more expenses in his I&E to around the same amount so costing a few £grand over the course of the arrangement - there would be no benefit to the proposal by forcing the sale.

Do you need the bike? Do you know anyone who would be willing to front some money to "buy" the interest in the bike from the IP?

EDIT: Can i just re-iterate that no-one is judging you here - admittedly MIVAA came across as quite abrupt but I'm sure (s)he was just warning you of the outcome of not declaring an asset... which obviously now you have declared but even if you hadn't it's nobody's business on here, all anybody here can do is give you the warning!

DejaVu_3

Hi Charco, yes I remember the post now. No, the bike is purely for pleasure, it may be possible for me to find someone to buy the interest, but I am sure that you well understand that there are other priorities now, like any equity in the house. I appreciate the edit, but I suppose if you ask a stupid question you should expect a nippy answer! Mind you, if we all lived like Hetty Wainthrop this would be a Forum about knitting and jam making and not one for folks who have finally spotted the writing on the wall plus 30%!

Not that I have a problem with knitting, jam making or other money saving activities.... anyone want to buy a bike helmet?

Best wishes, DejaVu

Charco_2

Only stupid question is the one that isn't asked (dont you just love cliches!?)

If there really isn't that much equity in the bike, it shouldn't be too much bother, instead of selling it your IP may allow you to make an extra month or two of contributions to make up for it.

Lets hope there's not too much equity in the house too now then!

MIVAA

HI DejaVu

It appears that I may have caused you some offence with my short response earlier, but believe me, that was not the intention, and I apologise if that was the case.

But sometimes some things need saying clearly and without flowering, and I felt that this was one of them.

Not just for your benefit, but also for the benefit of anyone who may read this in future, who just might not get the message unless it is made as clearly as that.

Anyway, back to your situation. At £500 the IP may not consider your bike as of sufficient value as to make you sell it, and as Charco has said previously, you may be able to argue a case for him to let you keep it. It would definitely be worth a try, along the same lines as the other poster, where there was a value to your creditors in allowing you to keep it.

I hope this is the case for you.

With regard to the equity in your home, you need to be on your guard as to how the IP intends to deal with this.

Without wishing to state the bl**din' obvious - Trust Deeds are not the same as IVAs, and the way the equity issue is dealt with could be very different from how it is dealt with in an IVA.

There are one or to different ways the IP could choose to get the equity, but be sure you understand the full implications of his intentions before you sign the Trust Deed .

What choices are available will depend on how much equity there is, but just make sure you are OK with, and understand, whatever option he suggests.

Once signed there's no going back.

Good luck.

MIVAA