Bankruptcy and unreasonable IPA Agreement

WLITC

Have you signed and returned the IPA? If not then as the others have refuse to sign it. I would imagine that it'll take the OR weeks if not a few months to take it to court for an IPO so you could use that time to save for a care and then resubmit your expenditure to reflect the car, tax, insurance payments, petrol costs, annual MOT, maintenance and all any possible related costs, etc.

amstel2

Not wanting to offend anyone but have you been "too honest" when giving your figures to the O/R.

When i went BR i over inflated some of my living expenses & they just accepted it & i was left with a big surplus every month. I even kept my car when their was excellen public transport availiable.

My own experience of the BR experience was that it was very easy i had no assets (apart from the car) & had nothing to lose but i know it's not like this for everyone.

Don't forget the banks & politicians are far more dis-honest than anything i did.

PippaGirl_2

Muckers, you say "just under 12 months ago" you went BR, can I ask how long is it until your AD? I am just wondering if negotiations on a new more realistic IPA might take you past that day so an IPA is not enforceable.

Muckers_Mate

Due to be discharged 14/02. 11 Days 13 hrs, 17'57" to go. Not that I'm counting.

I don't think delaying tactics would work.

WLITC

Muckers_Mate wrote: »

Due to be discharged 14/02. 11 Days 13 hrs, 17'57" to go. Not that I'm counting.

I don't think delaying tactics would work.

What have you got to lose? If you refuse to sign it then they'll make a decision as to whether it's worth taking back to court. If they are bogged down with work and so close to the AD date they might not even have time to process anything before AD kicks in. I guess if they have time they may delay AD for just enough time to take it to court. But either way if they do get a court date then your no worse off and will probably be better off as the judge might see your side of the argument. No real negative letting them take it to court, doesn't hurt you any more than BR already does.

When did you receive the IPA? I think your meant to send it back in 7 days (???) wait until the day 6 and then send it back (don't call them as that will give them a chance to get things in motion) with a note saying you think it's unreasonable. Send it 2nd class, signed for so you have proof it was sent off on time.

The experts here are telling you NOT to sign it and go back to them if your not comfortable with it. Listen to these guys, they know what they are talking about. Don't let your OR bully you into to sign somethinG that you believe you can't live with. If you stick within the rules (ie writes and tell them you are not happy with it), they can't make life any more difficult for you.

Muckers Mate, also check out this post https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4755340

woodformoretrees

Also it took them three months to get to this point. I wouldn't rush in accepting it. Negotiations may well take longer than the 12 days you have left - especially taking only working days into account.

Muckers_Mate

Thanks to everyone for all the advice given here.

I haven't signed anything yet but I'm drafting a letter stating my disappointment with their decision to take 100% of my disposable income. I've also expressed my incredulity at their facile chicken-and-egg offer to review my payments AFTER I've purchased a car, when they know full well that this will never happen now they've taken everything.

Don't get me wrong, I've always appreciated the fact that I will have to at some stage, to make some kind of reparation, but 100% of my disposable income? For 3 years? It makes a mockery of having to endure the bankruptcy process, only to find yourself at the end of it in a similar position to what you were in at the start.

I did find an interesting post (showthread=4755340)
by Debt Doctor on another thread in which the following comment was made...

" the IS accepted that a bankrupt could have some spare cash with no allocation - £85pm loose change if you like.
Such allowances support the definition in law of 'reasonable domestic needs' to become satisfied as opposed to basic needs, which in isolation, is what the family expenditure survey is."

I believe the pertinent phrases are "spare cash" and "no allocation". I take this to imply that once the OR has accepted your outgoings , they must leave you with what amounts to "pocket money" and therefore cannot claim the whole of your remaining disposable income.

Anyway, I'll wait a while before I submit the letter. I've always responded promptly to them in the past, while they've sometimes taken weeks to get back to me.

Thanks again everyone.

MM

p.s. Sorry to WILTC, I posted this before I read your response and redirection to the thread I mentioned above.

PippaGirl_2

I would take a while to reply (but respond within the time given) Some people choose to have their own accommodation at a time like this and if you did choose to you could say that your circumstances are imminently about to change and that you cannot stay with your parents much longer and are about to find accommodation and will be compiling a new SOA with rent/utilities/counciltax etc. and will send it to them when it is completed.

I think 12 days, less when thinking of working days, isn't long.

alastairq

I haven't signed anything yet but I'm drafting a letter stating my disappointment with their decision to take 100% of my disposable income. I've also expressed my incredulity at their facile chicken-and-egg offer to review my payments AFTER I've purchased a car, when they know full well that this will never happen now they've taken everything.
/QUOTE]

Not a good argument.

Firstly..as current IS rules stand, if more than £20 per month surplus is identified, the OR will claim 100% of surplus income.

So..that is the percentage of surplus the OR is entitled to claim [and it has always been thus, surprisingly...although IS rules did, and do, allow some flexibility].

The OR will not bend those rules per se, for an individual.

However, where the flexibility [and your argument] lies, is with the expenditure on your SOA.

This is where you should direct your argument.

However, if the figures the OR is working from, are your own figures......then going back to ask for more expenditure under your present circumstances might not work either.

Where such an argument does work occurs when an OR disagrees with expenditure on an SOA.

Delay your response to the OR's letter.

But, respond you must! [eventually....for fear you are deemed 'uncooperative?'}

Most likely argument to have effect is if you move out from parents' home, as has been suggested?

This will increase your SOA, probably to leave no surplus income?

lilybankrupt

It seems to me there are two separate issues here.

The first is your frustration that they take all your spare income after essentials. Unfortunately, aside from £10 for emergencies, this is the way it works. It used to be that they took a % of your spare income, but the rules are now 100%.

Personally I agree that this policy is harsh, and actually discourages people from working hard to improve their situation and make a fresh start.

I know that Debtdoctor argues this point frequently and does a brilliant job, but I think cases where someone gets unallocated cash are few and far between.

I only say this because I'm wondering whether arguing the 100% rule is not really going to help you?

The second issue is where you can, and should, argue your case. Reasonable living costs includes various types of expenses and you need to ensure all of your expenses are included. Debtdoctor knows far more about this one than me so i'll butt out now!