TV Rental

londonTiger

look up IPO in relation to bankruptcies. bankrupt person must pay back a portion of their leftover income to pay towards debts. Op is trying to reduce the IPO by spending money on stuff - I presume equipment rentals are allowed but large purchases are disallowed hence the interest in renting.

Though not sure if a bankrupt person can get a rental tv. They are ususally a form of finance, hence rent to own and go through credit checks

arcon5

People are aware of IPO and IPAs but questioning the logic in ops action. The allowances aren't compared to actual expenditure, they are merely 'allowed' from the income. So try your luck putting an allowance down - and if it's questionned state it's to allow reasonable wear and tear of household goods.

There's got to be better way than adding £20 or whatever / month in TV rental.

Post up an SOA for help in entering the optimum allowance.

And of course we will also ignore the moral implications in deliberately going out to see your creditors loose potentially some form of financial recompense.

debtinfo

Also just to mention that the first part of the money recovered in assets such as IPA's goes to pay for the running of the bankruptcy service rather than to pay creditors. Each year the Insolvency service has to review this income (which is the major part of the income to run the Insolvency Service) and decide if they should keep the deposit that each bankrupt pays to go bankrupt the same or whether it needs to increase it. Therefore if people who could pay an IPA manage to avoid it it does mean that future bankrupts who may be in a much worse situation may find it more difficult to raise the deposit to apply.

So whilst i appreciate that some bankrupts (by no means all) may not have any moral qualm in reducing the payment to their creditors many more may find the moral question more nuanced when it comes to shafting their fellow potential bankrupts who will be applying in the future. Its one to chew over.