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

JCS1

fermi wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how willing the OR is to go for an IPO in marginal or disputed cases.

I can't imagine that they have the funding to cope with a wholesale increase in IPO applications through the courts?

I'm not aware of any costs for IPO hearing apart from an AOR attending court, though any costs would have gone to a different department to process so I might be wrong.

fermi

JCS1 wrote: »

I suspect that there will be a test case with an IPO going in front of a judge to decide. IF that goes in the OR's favour, then they have the case precedent to quote to other judges.

Precedent on what? The 100%? Fair expenditure?

If so, I wasn't completely referring to that. More that there might just be a big increase in people saying "I'm not signing that". If that happens, will they go for the IPOs?

I haven't looked into the cost implications, so it's probably idle/irrelevant speculation on my part.

fermi

Oops! Posting a bit at cross purposes I think.

JCS1

Or, if so many people refuse to sign do they then have to decide whether to back down?

I just feel for those who haven't yet had interviews and are totally unware of the changes.

fermi

JCS1 wrote: »

Or, if so many people refuse to sign do they then have to decide whether to back down?

I just feel for those who haven't yet had interviews and are totally unware of the changes.

Exactly?

Poppylachops

As I posted earlier in this thread, my husband and I went BR on Wednesday and we read this thread the next day just as we were starting to feel a little better about it all.

We are now s****ing it as we've been told our OR interview is the 2nd Dec and we've based our SOA on the old guidelines. As it is our circumstances our changing in Feb 2011 anyway so would have to submit another SOA but all these changes scare me when we went BR on the old guidelines

Shall we ring our OR and ask for some advice before our interview and let him know we're aware of the changes?

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh :eek:

alastairq

I would certainly not have gone down the BR path had these rules been in place. I would have tried negociatng with creditors instead.

This is a very pertinent point.

Over the past couple of years [including my own BR period] I have noticed that many people declare BR with debts versus income as quite a low ratio.

In other words, the actual debt amounts are quite low.....maybe not DRO levels, but low anyway.

[Mine were quite high compared to my income]...

I suspect for many,alternative methods of dealing with this debt may have looked unattractive compared to BR? [many often noting the huge time period for alternative methods??]

It has become a case of, comparing allowances and surpluses.
With the new rules, many will now re-consider other methods of dealing with their debts....

If the debts are huge, then there is no option...but if they are marginal, ie a choice twixt BR or, for example, IVA, then folk will look at what they are allowed to have left?

I foresee a fall in the overall number of BR's, perhaps?

Which, although counter-productive as far as fund raising is concerned, will certainly have the effect of improving the efficiency of the IS...since there will be less to do?
This can be argued and equated to a cost saving at BH levels?

Although if the above does prove the case [people making more suitable choices if the debt isn't too large]....it does make me feel there is more influence being exerted here than just from Cabinet Office or Treasury levels?

Maybe the large financial institutions [with their powerful lobby] are actually needing to stem losses accrued via BR?

Maybe, this forum and those contributing to it, is proving more than effective?

debtinfo

I disagree alastair, The fact is that the opposite is true, there are not enough bankruptcies for the IS to deal with in its current form. Hence this money generating exercise

The problem with people choosing other options is that unlike IVA's and DMP's, bankruptcy is a final solution, it cant really fail like the others and the debts really are finally gone

max_pug

Great, just what I need.

I had been saving the mioney up for fee's when my car went wrong, needed to use the money that I had saved for the car and now can't go BR until new year!! I failed my IVA on the understanding of the old rules regarding IPA.
May as well of continued to struggle with the IVA!!!

1worried1

Hey, c
an someone help to answer my question please, as confused!
I went BR on 29th Oct 2010 & OR interview on 12th Nov, I had £0 surplus so make no payments to moonbeaver, I am waiting for nil tax code to happen (is this an IPA/IPO?), so in march I will get a small payrise about £30 and i also get a performance related bonus, last years cleared £2000 (was told not to include this in SOA as its not gauranteed), will all of this now be taken under the new rules? or do I still fall under the old rules and they take approx 70%?
Thanks for you help