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

Tupperware_Queen

welshladinthecity wrote: »

Clearly some people are fine with getting an IPA and see it as part of their punishment (i.e I got myself in this position and therefore I should give something back),

I don't see it as a punishment as such, just as part of the rules.

For me, being BR has and would continue to feel (if I had an IPA) like a prision sentence and being on probation for 3 years. The thought of having to report everything (changes in income, if I moved address, etc) would feel like I was constantly being monitored and a constant reminder of the mess I got into.

I really know how you feel on that score - I have kept the receipts for just about everything I have bought since the BR, so I can prove, if asked, what the money was spent on, ie essentials not luxuries. (though why even bankrupts can't be allowed a tiny bit of luxury from time to time I'm not sure.)

I really just want to move on and have a life. Due to my debts these past several years I have effectively had no life .....

I just want to make a fresh start and start having a social life again (and maybe even meet someone)

I agree with you on that one too....many years bailing out an OH who has subsequently upped and gone anyway, make me feel like I have lost several years of my life ....and now I want to get on with not losing any more!!

An IPA, especially at the new levels would essentially mean another 3 years of a wasted life, sitting at home gettting more depressed than I already am.

I do understand what you mean, but in these straightened times, everyone is tightening their belts. I don't want to sound like some happy clappy fruit cake, but get out and do some free stuff - lots of local clubs cater for all kinds of hobbies, and you don't need loads of cash either.
I know its hard, I have struggled with depression myself for many years, but I know the signs, and that I have to keep going, get out and about, eat regular meals etc etc or I will slip back - and I really don't want that.

take care, and, in the words of the famous sir monty of python...always look on the bright side xxxx

debtinfo

Hardupandfedup wrote: »

What happens if they try to give you a IPA but you dont agree, I know it can go to court and you can get a IPO but does it cost the br anything?
Just wonder if it would be best to just not agree and make them go for a IPO?
Whats the worst that would happen? You might get a IPO anyway but is that the worst of it?
I have not got a ipa but may have a small payrise soon which would, as things stand take me over the £20.
Just thinking it would be as well to make them go for a IPO and see what happens.

Well in theory it is mostly the same, the main differences are that it can only be altered by the court, so if you have a change in circumstances you then have to go back to court to get it altered each time. Also the OR can if it is not paid ask for it to be paid direct from wages.

The above are meerley inconveniences really. The Biggest difference is the uncertainty really, In an IPA you negotiate and so know what you have signed up to if you agree. In an IPO it is down to the judge on the day who may disagree with your expenses, IE they are not bound by any of the OR's guidelines, they can make the order as they see fit. Of course that may be in your favour or it may be in the OR's favour.

In the past the OR nearly always won as they know the local judges and would only seek an order they thought they would win. Now with the changes i imagine it will be less clear cut as it hasnt been tested yet

wolfers

My guess -- based on nothing more than wishful thinking -- is that if my SOA says I have a surplus of £19, the OR is only going to try to argue his way into an IPA with me if his version of what my SOA should be is substantially above £20. In other words, he's not going to say, "I think your surplus is £21 not £19 -- Ha! Got you: You owe me an IPA". Certainly under those circumstances, I would resist the IPA very strongly.

Former_MSE_Andrea

Hi everyone

Could you try to ensure this particular thread stays on topic?

Thanks in advance!

Andrea

wolfers

MSE_Andrea wrote: »

Hi everyone

Could you try to ensure this particular thread stays on topic?

Thanks in advance!

Andrea

Exactly what are you objecting to?

elliesmemory1

I cant see that it is off topic.

bat-out-of-hell

MSE_Andrea wrote: »

Hi everyone

Could you try to ensure this particular thread stays on topic?

Thanks in advance!

Andrea

wolfers wrote: »

Exactly what are you objecting to?

Hardupandfedup wrote: »

I cant see that it is off topic.

I agree with andrea, and can see what certain posters are trying to do, but it takes an oldy like me to see it, and one of the reason i dont post much anymore...........its old, and very boring!

wolfers

bat-out-of-hell wrote: »

I agree with andrea, and can see what certain posters are trying to do, but it takes an oldy like me to see it, and one of the reason i dont post much anymore...........its old, and very boring!

Rather than making cryptic comments, if you've got something to say can you say it please. I can't see any post on this thread that is objectionable. If you can and if it's spoiling your enjoyment of the forum then it would be helpful to explain where the problem is.

minicooper1961

bat-out-of-hell wrote: »

I agree with andrea, and can see what certain posters are trying to do, but it takes an oldy like me to see it, and one of the reason i dont post much anymore...........its old, and very boring!

It is not very old and very boring to me..in fact it is highly relevant......to those of us who are stuck between a rock and a very hard place.........

now

I just think the change in the rules are very harsh I agree if an IPA has to be paid it has to be paid it just seems a little quick on the timescales on putting it in place. £99 was barely enough for a family with 2 children, £20 leaves very little for any emergency which may arise