Discharged next week - but what's really changed?

dojoman

I understand that with the new rules, but the question I have posted relates to the old rules under which I was assessed, and the case that Tiger refers to was under the old rules. What are you supposed to do with monies left over that cannot be taken under an IPA. AFAIK, the percentage figures in the old rules were not guidelines but actual rules and not open to different interpretations by different OR`s

kepar

That is what I am asking too, if in the case Tiger refers to , the woman in question had a large amount spare, that money is hers. The rules say 70% so she will have spare. Good luck to her for saving that amount, and I still do not understand how she lost it.

debtinfo

dojoman wrote: »

I understand that with the new rules, but the question I have posted relates to the old rules under which I was assessed, and the case that Tiger refers to was under the old rules. What are you supposed to do with monies left over that cannot be taken under an IPA. AFAIK, the percentage figures in the old rules were not guidelines but actual rules and not open to different interpretations by different OR`s

kepar wrote: »

That is what I am asking too, if in the case Tiger refers to , the woman in question had a large amount spare, that money is hers. The rules say 70% so she will have spare. Good luck to her for saving that amount, and I still do not understand how she lost it.

As i have have said on numerous occasions, they were not rules just guidelines issued by the Insolvency service. There has been no actual change in the RULES laid down by law since 2004

I imagine that the OR expected you to spend the part you were left with, afterall it was common for the examiner to say something was not included in their expenditure but could be taken out of the part that was left to them.

Taking savings rarely happens and i imagine it only will if you shove it in the creditors or OR's face how much you have saved. Then the OR can simply say, well you obviously didnt need that money then

dojoman

Thanks for the clarification DI, much appreciated

Richardsct

debtinfo wrote: »

The OR does not routinely monitor bankrupt's bank accounts, but if they have reason to they can look at them, hence why not a good idea to boast in front of creditors

As i said it is fairly rare, and would need to be a significant amount to trouble the OR, the above woring is quite open as to allow the OR to use their discretion.

What happens when you are discharged and pay no IPA (I understand an IPA has to be in place BEFORE discharge so once discharged that threat has gone) - will the OR still have a right to look at my bank account? and how can one find out? surely it would be illegal

Ineedaname

No worries there Richard, once discharged your money is your own.

Richardsct

if I get a job after discharge I dont have to tell them do I?

Is there anything they have to be informed of after discharge?

Ineedaname

As you have no IPA and are discharged then you are now also discharged from the responsibility of telling the OR anything about your life. However, they can still ask for information if they are continuing investigations, but you'd probably be aware if they were likely to do that.

alastairq

Richardsct wrote: »

What happens when you are discharged and pay no IPA (I understand an IPA has to be in place BEFORE discharge so once discharged that threat has gone) - will the OR still have a right to look at my bank account? and how can one find out? surely it would be illegal

I recommend you trawl thoroughly through the stickies at the top regarding what actually occurs with BR, from the Court onwards.

You may then get explanations and answers to all these questions?


In simple terms, when the Judge stamps the Petition, all the BR's financial affairs, and assets, are turned over to the Receiver.

After allowing for reasonable living expenses, whatever is left is realised for the creditors [after costs, etc are deducted].....


The debts remain in place, [[but creditors are forbidden by law, to pursue]...whilst the BR is undischarged....this enable s the Receiver to do the required delving to ensure equity for the creditors.


Once the Receiver has completed all delvings, the BR is discharged.

The debts no longer exist.

[However, there are caveats within the legislation that allow a Receiver to re-investigate the Ex-BR's affairs if evidence subsequently comes to light....but this is more to do with the Court not being made aware of all the facts when the petition was heard.].

For the duration of a surplus-based IPA [or IPO] the ex-BR needs to keep the Receiver informed of changes in income so that the IPA can be adjusted to suit.....[also, changes in circumstances as that may affect the surplus.....]

Remembering, an IPA is an agreement between the two parties, and is subject to continual negotiation...an IPO means the Court needs to be aware of changes...since the Court ordered it in the first place.

Remembering that BR isn't a punishment for an apparent failure.

There is no intention to inflict hardship on the BR.


As for creditors and hardship? Well....where trade is conducted on a credit basis, then BR is a hazard that must be allowed for. [ie what is the likelihood, etc].

After all, the Law is there for creditors to use, if hardship occurs...

MTDancer

dojoman wrote: »

Wrong, what you do with your money has nothing to do with anyone once the SOA and IPA has been agreed.

Really don't want to disagree with you as I think you offer the best advice on here BUT my trustee wants to see bank account statements every month even after an IPA has been set up. He queries just about every purchase and even queried why cash lumps were taken out even though they were for food!
I think it depends on the OR or receiver.