Urgent news on IPA's - Changes for BRs after 01/12/2010

Flyright

It doesn't alter the fact that people are still getting relief from their debts by choosing the bankruptcy route and that those who can afford to contribute to their bankruptcy by way of an IPA should do so.

debtinfo

Flyright wrote: »

It doesn't alter the fact that people are still getting relief from their debts by choosing the bankruptcy route and that those who can afford to contribute to their bankruptcy by way of an IPA should do so.

I dont think that anyway was trying to say that flyright, What was being discussed was the scale of that contribution

alastairq

question....if the expected increases in IS revenues still do not meet targets for self-sufficiency..what then?

Also,I suspect what has occurred is similar to the sort of policies that emerge from the Ministry I work for......that is, any savings in costs do not in any way take into account the increased expenditure accrued whilst making the initial cost saving?

I think we could see this coming over a year ago?

When an awful lot of ED's were not pursued...?

elliesmemory1

It seems wrong that if you went br in the last few months and didnt get a ipa and you get a small payrise etc now you will be reassesed on th new rules.
In my case I had a very small surplus but if i get a payrise that takes me over the twenty pounds I will now get a ipa and yet someone who had a surplus of say £95 but does not get reasssed as they have no changes will not get one.
Will they be taking in to account the rise in cost of living ie food petrol heating etc some of these costs have gone in in the last feew months.

pauleenbruce

also vat will rise in january as we all know this will affect the cost of everything from utility bills to food so will we get allowed extra for living expenses

philnicandamy

its possible...eventually

alastairq

pauleenbruce wrote: »

also vat will rise in january as we all know this will affect the cost of everything from utility bills to food so will we get allowed extra for living expenses

The 'allowances' are not set-in-stone either...but can be subject to negotiation.

Therefore, if a BR finds their living costs, for example, are set to climb, then they can negotiate with the OR for an increased allowance.

Of course, as in any negotiation, one must back up one's arguments with hard evidence.

hearsay or urban myth wont hack it.

elliesmemory1

alastairq wrote: »

The 'allowances' are not set-in-stone either...but can be subject to negotiation.

Therefore, if a BR finds their living costs, for example, are set to climb, then they can negotiate with the OR for an increased allowance.

Of course, as in any negotiation, one must back up one's arguments with hard evidence.

hearsay or urban myth wont hack it.

I understand that, but what about things like pet insurance etc that people paid from their surplus before but will now have no surplus.
Does that mean that we will all have to rehome our pets.
There are many other things that people paid for from the surplus so what happens now.

debtinfo

I think people will have to reassess what is strictly essential to have in their household

deadinthewater

does this mean that due to your income if you had not put things like holiday and clothing allowance on your original soa and you then get a pay rise of say £60 month you can then add these items to your soa thus cancelling out the extra money so you would be under the £20 threshold again???