IPA Avoidance

davidgmmafan

"Quite right Freddie, I completely agree with you. The 'old' rules would have given you that fairness and the new ones do not. Bankruptcy is now massively out of step with all other forms of insolvency, and it needs putting right."

To be honest when I was looking at the options I found an IVA much worse than bankruptcy even under the new rules. I DO agree there is a certain stupidity in the current system. I too could be doing overtime, its optional, but what's the point if its all going to be taken.

Perhaps they could give the rules a bit more discretion? If it were a percentage taken then I might entertain it. It may be that that's how they would actually play it, as the system is administered by people after all, but I'm afraid a lot of people are simply not going to ask.

Anyway back to my original point I rather thought the elimination of any surplus brought bankruptcy more into line with IVA's. I realize it was motivation by economics, and it probably causes more problems than it solves as there needs to be more work done when checking figures given bankrupts.

I'm not advocating manipulating the figures, but I think it is what many people may do.

the_suns_is_out

I seem to be the minority, on this thread, but wanted to add my 2 pennies.

I am BR, on the new rules for IPA. I have an IPA, one I have agreed to.

I too went through the mindset of thinking I should "adapt" my figures to avoid an IPA, get my head down for 12 months and not change anything, and then be "home free".

Then I was realistic. 12 months is a long time in this job market, anything can happen and I am damned if I am going to not progress my career because I was an idiot with money years ago.

I feel that there is no point worrying what I would have got in the "old" rules, that is irrelevant to me, my situation is my own doing and if I pay back a lot, good, I will feel morally better for it.

My new plan is that I am aiming to progress in work and get to the point where my IPA is £400+. The logic being, I will by then be used to living on my budget, that means I will have my IPA amount a month extra at the end of the 36 months. I will have another 3 years until the BR drops off my record. That's over £14k I will be able to save over that next 3 years. I have got some way into making a deposit for a house in future years.

Also, 3 months into my BR now I am so much better off than I have ever been. I now have money to one side ready for when I need it. That's pretty major.

I understand the reasoning behind avoiding an IPA, and for someone who is totally secure in a job they want to do forever, then I am sure it works. But for me, it wouldn't and I would feel dis-honest.

kepar

the_suns_is_out wrote: »

I seem to be the minority, on this thread, but wanted to add my 2 pennies.

I am BR, on the new rules for IPA. I have an IPA, one I have agreed to.

I too went through the mindset of thinking I should "adapt" my figures to avoid an IPA, get my head down for 12 months and not change anything, and then be "home free".

Then I was realistic. 12 months is a long time in this job market, anything can happen and I am damned if I am going to not progress my career because I was an idiot with money years ago.

I feel that there is no point worrying what I would have got in the "old" rules, that is irrelevant to me, my situation is my own doing and if I pay back a lot, good, I will feel morally better for it.

My new plan is that I am aiming to progress in work and get to the point where my IPA is £400+. The logic being, I will by then be used to living on my budget, that means I will have my IPA amount a month extra at the end of the 36 months. I will have another 3 years until the BR drops off my record. That's over £14k I will be able to save over that next 3 years. I have got some way into making a deposit for a house in future years.

Also, 3 months into my BR now I am so much better off than I have ever been. I now have money to one side ready for when I need it. That's pretty major.

I understand the reasoning behind avoiding an IPA, and for someone who is totally secure in a job they want to do forever, then I am sure it works. But for me, it wouldn't and I would feel dis-honest.

I totally agree with your logic. That is what I have been trying to say. Although my wife is under the old rules she is still paying nearly £400 a month. She has nearly reached the last payment. We intend to save all this extra, we haven't had it . it will be extra. With the money we have saved and will save, in the next 3-5 years we should have a big deposit.

All those who drop out of work, refuse promotions etc are only looking short term.

Former_MSE_Andrea

Hi everyone

Can you remember to keep threads on topic and not get personal please?

Calling each other names doesn't help get the OP's question answered.

philnicandamy

better late than never eh?

MSE andrea saves the day....

freddy911

Just like to set a few things straight here, never did I mention lieing to or defrauding the OR, my question was about working overtime and not claiming the money for it. I dont want the over time or the money, but I have a responsibility to my employer to help them out when needed. As for missing a promotion? really? an employer would mark someone down for not claiming for overtime worked? what planet is this on??

Thanks to everyone with half a brain cell on this thread who at least could grasp my basic point, in that I have no objection to paying surplus income towards my br but 100% IPA's are completly unfair and only exist to provide income for the OR and not for the benefit to creditors. Not only this 100% means there is no value in people taking on overtime as they will get nothing, at least with 50% or 75% IPA's there is some encouragement to earn a little extra for both yourself and your creditors.

Anyway I got that promotion Kepar kindly wished I missed out on :P so with a 30% pay increase looks like ill be getting the IPA regardless.

So next step, challenge the 100% IPA rule. Anyone any advise on how to go with this? I presume the first step would be to refuse the IPA so the IS takes you to court to get a BRO. Is this a battle worth taking on?

Ineedaname

I think the issue over working unpaid overtime is down to what is in your contract and whether the OR would expect you to be paid if they found out you were doing it for free. So make sure you have it sorted with your employer if that's the route you want to go down, e.g. voluntary unpaid overtime.

As for challenging the 100% rule - I'm not able to comment on whether that's possible or not, other members may be able to make some observations for you.

kepar

Anyway I got that promotion Kepar kindly wished I missed out on

I think you read that wrong. Good for you I am glad that you got promoted.

What I was implying is that we have had posters on here who give up jobs and turn promotion down so that they do not have to pay an IPA. Like I said that was short term.

If you take the promotion, although you will probably take a hit with an IPA, long term you will reap the benefits.

freddy911

debtinfo wrote: »

as i said above there are always some people that spoil it for the rest,

debtinfo wrote: »

it has nothing to do with what percentage is taken there always have been people that will try and avoid paying anything, even under the old "fair system"

So that justifies 100% IPA's?? Because someone will always try to find ways out of it?

Just out of curiosity I belive from your previous posts you used to work for the IS? forgive me if I got that wrong? but do you personally agree with the 100% IPA System?

freddy911

kepar wrote: »

Anyway I got that promotion Kepar kindly wished I missed out on

I think you read that wrong. Good for you I am glad that you got promoted.

What I was implying is that we have had posters on here who give up jobs and turn promotion down so that they do not have to pay an IPA. Like I said that was short term.

If you take the promotion, although you will probably take a hit with an IPA, long term you will reap the benefits.

You right and my determiantion to avoid an IPA is not that great that ill screw up my career, my original post was about working overtime that i dont even want and not claiming for it not, not accepting promotion. This job will give me a significant IPA probably around £800 pm in the final year which I can accept for the benefits of the promotion, but short term OT doesnt carry the same personal value.