SOA Help

debt_doctor

michael1983l wrote: »

If I was to go BR, I would have to do it with the conscent of my parents and I would have to follow the rules as well. I'd hope to defer payment to my parents until after discharge, so I could potentially build up a pot now that would cover the payments until then.

So if I read that right, you intend to accumulate a lump sum before BR to use to pay your parents after BR?
All assets have to be notified to the OR, and to not do so is a criminal offence. There seems to be more criminal prosecutions in this area of Insolvency Law. - Don't do it.
and then you start or continue your preference to your parent - another offence.
You have to accept that all creditors are equal and that includes family, although I do understand how that feels.

EDIT- Sorry I skimmed the early post - its a loan for you in parents name - Its their loan, and you cannot pay it.

DD

michael1983l

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

So you are proposing to make a one off payment of £5,232, to the loan company, then not pay anything for 12 months?

I don't think the loan company will agree to that.

A one of payment would be classed as an overpayment (which would shorten the period of the loan), rather than an advanced payment.

They would still expect a payment every month, until the loan was cleared.

My parents are the creditor not the loan company. They transfered the loan to me from their account on the basis that I paid them back £436 a month for 72 months.

michael1983l

debt_doctor wrote: »

So if I read that right, you intend to accumulate a lump sum before BR to use to pay your parents after BR?
All assets have to be notified to the OR, and to not do so is a criminal offence. There seems to be more criminal prosecutions in this area of Insolvency Law. - Don't do it.
and then you start or continue your preference to your parent - another offence.
You have to accept that all creditors are equal and that includes family, although I do understand how that feels.


DD

I would pay them before BR the lump sum not after but in esscence the rest is correct.

So in reality it does appear that I have no other option than to dodge the debts for the time required. Which is no good for any party, I do not see what the creditors gain by that. But it appears that because of the law and the fact I am not willing to put my parents into the same position that I am in then I am forced to just do the least honourable thing and beneficial for me and the creditors.

debt_doctor

Now I'm really confused! lol


So your parents took a loan out and lent you the money paid to them?


Yes?


You can't pay it.


DD

[Deleted User]

You say your parents "may not be aware of my financial problems".

The fact they took out a substantial loan for you, would suggest they did know (or at least, should have known) of your financial problems.

If you were the OR, would you not find it odd that a parent would take out a substantial loan, for a son who was in a stable financial position?

debt_doctor

What the law is doing is giving all of your creditors the same protection and the right to receive a fair share of any proceeds - (often none)


DD

[Deleted User]

michael1983l wrote: »

My parents are the creditor not the loan company.

I'm afraid it is not as straightforward as that.

The loan company is the creditor for the original loan, and your parents are the debtor(s), until such times as the loan is repaid to the loan company.

Your parents cannot pass on to you, the liability for repaying the debt.

michael1983l

debt_doctor wrote: »

Now I'm really confused! lol


So your parents took a loan out and lent you the money paid to them?


Yes?


You can't pay it.


DD

My parents took out a loan at a time that I could not get one in their name and lent me the proceeds from it and I agreed to pay them back at the same rate as they pay the loan back. This loan was taken out previous to all of the debt that I am in now.

I appreciate that by law I should treat every creditor the same. But in reality, you know that it would be difficult for me to put my parents, who are approaching retirement age into a debt that they cannot afford to pay on their income. And no matter what the law says, they must realise that I have a family duty to preffer them to my other creditors. And I'd rather jump off a bridge and have them claim the proceeds of my life assurance (it is a work related company policy so does cover suicide) so that they can be paid than be forced by a OR or anybody else into a position of putting my parents into financial difficulties off of my doing.

michael1983l

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

I'm afraid it is not as straightforward as that.

The loan company is the creditor for the original loan, and your parents are the debtor(s), until such times as the loan is repaid to the loan company.

Your parents cannot pass on to you, the liability for repaying the debt.

Surely I have a liability to the money that has traceably been transferred to my account from theirs?

They have lent me the money not the bank, it just so happens that they borrowed to lend me the money themselves?

So I am liable for the money they transferred to my account right?

And they are liable for the loan they took to fund that transfer?

[Deleted User]

michael1983l wrote: »

But it appears that because of the law and the fact I am not willing to put my parents into the same position that I am in then I am forced to just do the least honourable thing and beneficial for me and the creditors.

Look at it from the position of the loan company.

Suppose you lent a friend £5,000 then, a few months later, the friend won the £20,000 Lotto raffle.

How would you feel, if you found out he had used the £20,000 to pay off four other friends, who had each loaned him £5,000?