Bankcruptcy and child benefit

upcackcreek

hiya all i,ve read a few times about child benefit not being counted as part of your earnings does anyone know if this is true? i,ve added it along with tax credits to my SOA and after working my expeniture etc out inc child benefit we are left before paying any debts with £42 a month but obviously if they dont count the child benefit we are minus...any advise greatly recieved

fermi

Yes I agree with blind.

All benefits should be included in your SOA for the court in an itemised list.
The OR needs to be able see the full details of your finances when they start the initial work on your case.

It is also vital that you fully declare any benefits, because some of these are never included as as part of your income when it comes to a 'Income Payment Agreement' calculation, eg Child benefit.

Many other types of benefit will only be included in an IPA calculation if there are other significant sources of income.

Make sure that all benefits are not included in your earned income Q 6.3, but are listed in Q 6.6.
Both CTC and WTC should go here, and be separate from earned income.

savagevixen

blind-as-a-bat wrote: »

We also recommend that where the debtor does have other income, neither Child benefit or related benefits in respect of children nor child tax credits should form part of the calculation of disposable income.


Again, this follows the current Insolvency Service guidance in respect of Income Payment Orders with an added reference to tax credits. Where the debtor has income from the state benefits disability living allowance, attendance allowance or carer’s allowance, these should not be included in the assessment of available income. These benefits is designed specifically to make a contribution to the extra costs of disability or of caring for a disabled person.




but as far as your your I&E YOU use it to make ends meet so put it down if you need to:D

Wahoo- well done blind!!:D Well found!

fermi

blind-as-a-bat wrote: »

its the bit 'where the debtor does have other income' that bothers me what do they mean exactly by 'other income' ?

I think you've read this blind, but for the benefit of others anyway.

But yes, the definition of what exactly falls under the other in addition to benefits is vague.

31.7.9 State benefits

An IPA should not be sought where the bankrupt's only or main source of income is state benefit payments without any other significant source of income [note 3]. This applies even in the rare circumstances where the official receiver's analysis of the bankrupt's income and expenditure discovers sufficient surplus for an IPA arising as a result of the income received by the bankrupt which either solely or chiefly comprises state benefits. The official receiver should consider that it is always open to the bankrupt who wishes to contribute, to make voluntary payments. If the bankrupt was minded to contribute on a voluntary basis, having been informed that their income appeared to be sufficient to produce a surplus taking in to account their reasonable domestic needs, a voluntary agreement could be incorporated into an IPA, but it would have to be clearly noted that no enforcement action would be taken if the bankrupt failed to make agreed voluntary repayments.

This does not mean that the official receiver must exclude all benefit payments received by the bankrupt when calculating available income for an IPA. The person making the calculation (usually the examiner) should first consider whether there is income paid to the bankrupt not comprising state benefit . If this is the case, an IPA may be a possibility, and any calculation of income should include all available income, including state benefits which are paid to an individual for the general benefit of that individual and their family. The notable exceptions to this rule when dealing with state benefits are disability living allowance (which is not considered by the Department of Work and Pensions to be income) and child benefit. The High Court has stated as a matter of public policy that child benefit and similar benefits should not be included in the statement of income when applying for an IPO and there is no reason why this point should not be extended to cover IPAs. Whilst it is acknowledged that in the figures for expenditure there may be outgoings for the benefit of the children, at least to the value of the child benefit received, to ensure that there is no risk of them being deprived of it, child benefit should not be included in IPA assessments. The Department of Work and Pensions website provides useful information regarding allowances and benefits currently in force and can be accessed at http://www.dwp.gov.uk/

Where the bankrupt is in receipt of benefits and other sources of income, the total income should be established (see other income sources at paragraph 31.7.7) and the bankrupt's reasonable expenses deducted (see paragraph 31.7.19). An assessment can then be made as to whether the bankrupt is in receipt of income surplus to his/her reasonable domestic needs. If there is a surplus of income, this surplus should be less than or equal to income from the source other than benefits in order for an IPA to be sought. It should be remembered that whilst the bankrupt's total income including state benefits should be included in the calculation of surplus income, it is the income from sources other than the benefit(s) which is providing the payments under the IPA/IPO, the surplus income from which an IPA is sought should not be comprised of state benefit.

fermi

Again yes.

The guidelines are guidelines only, and as such represent the OR's interpretation of insolvency and other laws at a snapshot in time.

They will be under constant revision as the law changes, and court precedents are set.

In fact most of the 'notes' in the guidelines simply link to a list of relevant Acts or precedents.

The only way to get absolutely the current interpretation of the law according to the OR's, would be to put in a formal query to to IS.

EDIT: I'm wondering about doing this, as there are some issues that come up time and time again and never seem to get a clear answer.

fermi

It'll be written by Civil Service middle/senior management, so not a chance in ***. :rotfl:

To be fair, when the law keep shifting under them it must be hard to keep track.
However they are paid to do so.:mad:

I am wondering whether to make a formal inquiry on some of these types of issues.

EDIT: I'm getting confused with all the edits. :rotfl: