car question ????

missfirefly

Hi all could somebody please advise me on what is best to do?..i am due to go br next thursday and i owe £548 on my cars hp .payments are due dec 20th and jan 20th.What i really need to know is can the OR take my car when i still owe this hp and will i still be allowed to make these payments after i have gone br or will it be seen as favouring a creditor.I am a little bit confused about what is best to do.Thankyou

fiveyearplan

Hi Missfirefly and welcome. Are you saying you only have 2 payments left on your car? If so, how much is the car worth? As it stands now, you do not own your car and the OR should have no interest in it however this is a busy time and you are very close to owning the car. There is nothing guaranteed where cars are concerned. Do you need the car for work?

missfirefly

the car is worth about £2200 book price.i have a disabled son who i need the car for to take him to and from school as public transport is a no no.i have doctors support with this if required.i am just a little bit confused of what is best to do??

philnicandamy

As fyp said you need to get as much supporting information as to why you need to keep the car rather than want to...have you checked the HP paperwork as well for the car to see if bankruptcy is mentioned?

you say the car is worth £2200 book price? the receiver uses parkers guide for valuation (so look at the "poor condition" price)

missfirefly

Hi ok thankyou i will double check the paperwork..i cant believe that people say to me how easy it is to br,this has got to be the hardest thing i have ever done in my life and i havnt even been to court yet.thankyou for your replies

InnerPeace

Hi, do you receive a carer's allowance so that in effect looking after your son is your work?

The attitude of ORs in respect of cars varies greatly but I would hope you'd be ok.

missfirefly

hi yes i do recieve carers allowance for my son which now raises another question im not sure about.Do i have to include his DLA in my SOA.??

InnerPeace

Hi, yes you need to declare all sources of income but it won't be taken into account when calculating surplus income because benefits are there to meet essential needs and not provide a surplus. Just itemise all different incomes so it's clear.

miss_spooky

Hi misfirefly, Have a read here. As you receive CA then the chances are that your car won't be touched.

My car is on HP with a few more months to pay so that does make a difference, but before we got to that bit I had told them that I was a carer for my ds who is deaf so have to get to hosp appts. It was automatically exempt at that point as I was primary carer.

With regards to the DLA for your son you don't have to include it if you don't want to as it is his money not yours. I didn't include mine but mentioned it during my interview when asked what benefits I was getting.


31.2.22(b) Bankrupt is a carer for a relative
Caring for others clearly can be a vocation and the means by which an individual earns their living (e.g. nurses, care assistants) there seems no reason why caring for another, who is in fact a relative, should be treated any differently. There are considerable number of "informal" and upaid carers in the country who would describe their "vocation" as that of a carer. Many may be eligible for a carer's allowance, an income maintenance benefit for those who are required to care for a severely disabled person. The allowance is a taxable benefit for informal carers, payable where the carer looks after a disabled person for at least 35 hours per week.
A bankrupt might therefore not be in paid employment and have no prospect of obtaining employment as a result of having taken on the care of a disabled relative (including a child). In considering whether the bankrupt has a "vocation" as a carer a material issue would be the time involved in undertaking the care, the receipt of any carer's allowance and the level of care required. For example the normal care of a child reasonably expected of a parent is not a "vocation" in this context but a parent caring for a disabled child would fall into this category.
In respect of a claim for a vehicle to be exempted under section 283(2)(a), the definition of "employment, business or vocation" has been widened following recent case law to include debtors who are informal, full-time, carers of a disabled friend or relative who would use the vehicle in connection with that role. The receipt of a carer's allowance is not essential but will be indicative that the debtor is pursuing a "vocation" as a carer.
31.2.23 Bankrupt claims he/she needs vehicle due to disability or for domestic use
A bankrupt may inform the official receiver that he/she suffers from a disability and that his/her motor vehicle is necessary for mobility or inform the official receiver that the vehicle is necessary for domestic use (e.g. to take children to school). The official receiver should treat such cases sympathetically but where the exemption provisions as laid down in the legislation do not apply the motor vehicle cannot be treated as exempt property by the official receiver (see paragraph 31.2.16.)
It is for the bankrupt to convince the official receiver that the motor vehicle is necessary, to the extent that no practical alternative exists, to meet a genuine need and not simply as a matter of convenience. If the use of vehicle does not meet the test of necessity the vehicle is vested in the bankruptcy estate and the official receiver should instead pursue with the bankrupt the option to make a reasonable offer for the purchase of the vehicle (see paragraph 31.2.34.)
For the purpose of determining necessity, a reasonably practical alternative does not mean no alternative. In most cases, a taxi service would offer an alternative to a private vehicle, but it should be borne in mind that the costs of regularly using such a service might well exceed the costs of maintaining a modest vehicle and thus compromise the debtor's ability to contribute to an income payments order/agreement. For example, a task that needs to be undertaken daily might be prohibitively expensive by taxi, but undertaking a weekly shop at the supermarket may well reasonably be achieved by using a taxi service rather than retaining the use of a vehicle.
Where a bankrupt claims to require a vehicle to transport children to and from school, he/she will need to demonstrate that there is no public transport alternative or that the distance to travel would make walking (or cycling) an impractical alternative. It is not sufficient for a bankrupt who lives in a rural area to claim a motor vehicle simply by virtue of distance from the school. The bankrupt must provide a statement that there is no transport alternative (e.g. a local authority school bus service) or, if there is more than one child, show that diverse locations makes it impossible to transport all the children to school by public transport. The practical problems such as organising children to walk to school, to travel with more than one child on public transport, or any general concerns expressed about safety are simply a matter of convenience and in such cases the vehicle is not necessary to meet a basic domestic need. However, if the children attend school in opposite directions and could not physically be delivered at school on time without the aid of a motor vehicle, it might be considered necessary to the household.
It is anticipated that the bankrupts most likely to benefit from the wider interpretation of exempt property, and the claims most likely to succeed, will be from bankrupts who suffer from a disability and state that the motor vehicle in question is necessary for mobility. In such cases, the bankrupt's disability would prevent them from seeking employment. Where this is the case, the official receiver must be satisfied that the vehicle allows the bankrupt a degree of independent living which would be impossible without the retention of a vehicle, and/or that there is no practical alternative to allow the bankrupt to undertake routine medical appointments or care associated with their disability.
In such cases, the vehicle should be used personally by the bankrupt and must not be a vehicle maintained for another's exclusive use with occasional assistance and transportation given to the bankrupt. If the bankrupt requires the assistance of another to travel, even in a motor vehicle, then the vehicle does not come within the exemption. Should this be the case, the main user of the vehicle should be invited to make an offer to purchase the vehicle (see paragraph 31.2.34.)
Bankrupts who live in an urban area with reasonable transport links are unlikely (other than as a result of disability) to be in a position to claim that a motor vehicle is necessary to meet a domestic need. For this reason, a decision that a motor vehicle is exempt property, unless the vehicle is required for employment (see paragraph 31.2.22) or is by reason of the bankrupt's disability, must be confirmed by an assistant official receiver.

31.2.24 Use of discretion
The Official Receiver should use his/her discretion to take action which is practical and expedient but which is also in the interest of the estate and of The Service in keeping administration costs down. The facts should be considered on a case by case basis.

missfirefly

thankyou all for your help...things seem much clearer now

InnerPeace

For extra info:

31.7.6 Identifying surplus income - initial stage
Whether completing the statement of affairs or in creditor petition cases the Bankruptcy Preliminary Information Questionnaire (form PIQB) the bankrupt should, in all cases, answer any questions regarding income and outgoings, providing full details of monthly income he/she receives (from all sources) and usual monthly expenditure.

If the DLA for your son is paid to you on his behalf, you do need to declare it. I hope that helps.