IVA and Bankruptcy expense question

luvchocolate

An ipa has to be in place before discharge.
I fail to see what you see to be wrong with the information given.
I am butting out of this thread now as its really full of wrong information and not helpful to anyone.

Depth_Charge

greek-dave wrote: »

Other expenditure items that could be considered :
Clothing
Holidays ???
Hairdressers
Extra curricular activities for children
After school clubs
Pets Horses!!!





Strange, my IP told me that they won't look at a IPO/IPA for the first year, so this NT tax status is irrelevant.

More inaccurate information from an official web site..

Hi

To be honest you have lost me a little with your quotes concerning your IP.

For the record I am a pet lover and a horse would come into that category:)

As another poster has alluded to, consistency in bankruptcy allowances can on occasions leave a lot to be desired, best I can say without knowing your full circumstances and IP:)

Just my honest take as always

DC

longtermplanner

greek-dave wrote: »

Would you expect someone to have a dog or cat destroyed so as to save a few pounds every month?

No. A few pounds a month can usually be easily "found" from the allowances for groceries. (Unless of course the person going bankrupt is a smoker - in that case they usually have a lot of trouble affording that habit.)

greek-dave wrote: »

BR isn't an easy decision to make, but what I was trying to suggest to the OP was that it is not as bad as people make out, normally because they know nothing about it and because it is portrayed on the TV in a manner that is simply not accurate.

There I completely agree with you. Bankruptcy in practice it is rarely as bad as people fear. There is a good description of what is involved here: http://debtcamel.co.uk/debt-options/bankruptcy/

I have never known anyone regret going bankrupt. They regret getting into the mess in the first place but not the decision.

However I see no point in pretending that bankruptcy is a piece of cake and that all current expenditure will be allowed to continue. It is just misleading to suggest that to anyone having to take a difficult decision.

greek-dave

Depth_Charge wrote: »

Hi

To be honest you have lost me a little with your quotes concerning your IP.

For the record I am a pet lover and a horse would come into that category:)

As another poster has alluded to, consistency in bankruptcy allowances can on occasions leave a lot to be desired, best I can say without knowing your full circumstances and IP:)

Just my honest take as always

DC

That post was taken from a link (that as a new user I can't post) that alluded to what may be deemed as allowable expenses.

My point was that there is simply no consistency as I had said that I have claimed an allowance for the livery of my horse, which some posters on here said was a luxury, yet that link to the Citizens Advice web site say's that "holidays" may be deemed as an acceptable allowance. Ridiculous to the extreme as some are saying that I must get rid of my horse, but then in the next breath they're saying that it's okay to kick-back on the beach in the Algarve!!

greek-dave

longtermplanner wrote: »

No. A few pounds a month can usually be easily "found" from the allowances for groceries. (Unless of course the person going bankrupt is a smoker - in that case they usually have a lot of trouble affording that habit.)



There I completely agree with you. Bankruptcy in practice it is rarely as bad as people fear. There is a good description of what is involved here:

I have never known anyone regret going bankrupt. They regret getting into the mess in the first place but not the decision.

However I see no point in pretending that bankruptcy is a piece of cake and that all current expenditure will be allowed to continue. It is just misleading to suggest that to anyone having to take a difficult decision.

I never said nor claimed that BR was an easy or lightly taken decision, what I have been trying to allude to is that out of the 3 main options available to someone in serious debt, those being an IVA, DMP & BR then BR, for me, was the best option. I have no equity in my house yet I have a property overseas that is largely equity. If I could have sold that property then I would of and I would have repaid my debts. Simple fact of the matter is that the country in which it is in is in a worse state than the UK and no one is buying property.

If the IP manages to sell it and claim my 50% then I'd be chuffed to bits and TBH, a little bit relieved that some of my creditors will have got some money from it. But if I'm being totally honest, there's as much chance of plaiting fog.

I was skinned by a DMP company for 3 months, Gregory Pennington, and upon reflection the whole process was akin to haggling over the price of a 2nd hand car. After 3 months of paying their £100 per month fee I cancelled the DMP and wrote to all of the creditors myself and offered them the same repayment terms as was being paid by GP. 70% of them accepted the terms but the others didn't, which made it impossible.

The next option was an IVA or as some refer to it, Bankruptcy Lite, but after my accountant, also a debt adviser, explained it to me, the decision to opt for BR was made simple.

alastairq

So... the Govt. website is, in fact, completely accurate.

The Govt information MUST be entirely accurate in its content......or are you suggesting they should be subject to something akin to 'trades' descriptions?'

It states clearly what happens within a BR.

It clearly mentions what happens to assets.

Now, whether that completely applies to an individual, or only partly applies, is where confusions arise.

'Holidays' is an intrinsic part of an SOA in bankruptcy.

It is not the ORs job, or brief, to punish either the BR, or those who share the BR's life.

ORs realise that a family holiday of sorts is part of basic living expenditure.

It isn't for the BR, but for those the BR supports.

Whether that money is used for a holiday or not, isn't the OR's concern.

The same applies to haircuts. The OR doesn't examine the bR to see if they still have hair...or not.

Yet, there are two categories within which an allowance can be made and agreed upon......monies which could be allocated elsewhere for items not allowed for???

An IVA is a form of Insolvency, but is totally different to Bankruptcy.

What you refer to as BR-lite should infact be the DRO.

Which is BAnkruptcy....but with certain advantages and limitations over the full BR petition...and where no fee's are paid to administer the Insolvency.

luvchocolate

thank you, thank you, thank you
always can rely on you to tell it the way it is!!!
happy new year

greek-dave

alastairq wrote: »

So... the Govt. website is, in fact, completely accurate.

The Govt information MUST be entirely accurate in its content.......

What I am alluding to is that all the "advice" paints the worst possible scenario, which is probably enough to stop many, many people from pursuing a possible BR any further. I was lucky as I have a good accountant that was quite happy to give me his time for free, but how many other people will read the doom & gloom on a government web site and then think, sod that, I'll just go with a DMP and then just get raped and pillaged for 5 years by a private money making company.

I suppose that in the end what I am trying to say is that as personal and household debt is on the increase, that access to FREE Debt Advisoors needs to be made more accessible as TBH, Citizens Advice are not.

fermi

The guidelines the official receiver works from are their best practice guidance on how to interpret the law. In the case of expense, that means that bankrupts should be allowed "reasonable domestic needs" as the law specifies.

The OR has one take on that, that they have changed over time.

An external IP is not bound by the OR's guidance, so can make their own determination that may be different from the OR's.

In case of dispute, with either the OR or IP, it is only the courts who can decide on what is truly "reasonable".

alastairq

What I am alluding to is that all the "advice" paints the worst possible scenario, which is probably enough to stop many, many people from pursuing a possible BR any further

The IS website isn't about 'giving advice'.

No Govt site is about 'giving advice, in respect of debt.

What they are about, is laying down the facts of ..in this case, bankruptcy.

Once one is in receipt of the facts..then..and only then, can one make informed decisions.

But..as will no doubt be remembered, one of the things a judge enquires of the petitioner is, has the petitioner sought proper advice beforehand?

Hence why the sage advice on this forum, and from any of the Debt Charities is, first contact such charities [CAB, Stepchange..or even, pay for it?}

Whether a DMP, or other, paid-for debt remedy, suits is down to each individual's circumstances.

Whichever debt remedy if followed, is down to the extent of debt, and how much the debtor is keen to maintain the 'status quo' of their lifestyle.

Much will depend on what assets, or what lifestyle the debtor is trying to protect?




CAB, for example, can only apply the resources they have available.

Being a voluntary organisation, they are subject to the vagaries that volunteers provide. CAB does have 'dedicated' debt counsellors, who are able to act for each individual..but CAB isn't well funded...and there are many other issues to be dealt with, apart from debt.

If we complain about the quality of service from a Charitable Organisation..[which, by its very nature, we should not have complaint about?]....then do something about it...namely....volunteer?

I'm sure the likes of CAB would welcome people with direct experience of debt, bankruptcy, etc......and they do offer appropriate training.

If anyone has had bad experiences navigating the debt remedy system, then why not offer their advice, to others, so that those others may negotiate the pitfalls and urban myth that so confused us all at some point or other?

If, eventually, one gets something out, then why not put something back?