How often does the official receiver review expenses?

timross

My interview was AWFUL and I have to pay for three years. I went in very relaxed thinking it was a non judgemental interview and she was bloody terrible to me, told me that she suspected financial misconduct because I let my partner file all the taxes and expenses while i worked like crazy and supported us both, and I should have taken my responsibility as a director of my own limited company more seriously and she would ask HMRC to consider additional restrictions of between 2 and 15 years against me. She told me on the phone that she didn't want to hear more about the sob story, I am responsible for my own finances, full stop, and failed to take my responsibilities serioiusly. This doesn't seem to be everyone's experience, I guess I got a really miserable cow to deal with

Basically my ex told me everything was paid (I'm an IT consultant) but really the tax payments to HMRC and all the bill payments for furniture etc for two years went to a secret bank account and then one day I was left holding the bag.

The OR told me I would probably be coming in for a face to face interview to find out more about how I could have let this happen. I could understand if I had been bankrupt before and it was a repeat performance but first time bankrupt? Really?

My questions are:

what can happen if I tell them no, i'm not going to relive all the details of my failed relationship and justify to them why I let my ex control the finances while I worked, commuted 5 hours a day and studied at the weekends in medical school

Does the official receiver review your outgoings by looking at bank statements and receipts etc annually? Will I have to deal with this witch every year?

National_Debtline

Hi timross

I'm sorry to hear the interview was not a very pleasant experience. You're right in that this differs from the feedback one tends to read on these forums, but it just goes to show that no two bankruptcies are identical.

The best thing you can do is to put to one side any personal animosity you may be feeling towards the OR and focus on getting through the process. This does mean having to jump through whatever hoops the OR lines up for you.

The request for a face to face interview may actually work in your favour. The OR may feel she can better determine when speaking with you in person whether the financial problems arose through plain old misjudgment, as opposed to any deliberate financial misconduct.

To answer your questions directly:

timross wrote: »

what can happen if I tell them no, i'm not going to relive all the details of my failed relationship and justify to them why I let my ex control the finances while I worked, commuted 5 hours a day and studied at the weekends in medical school?

I don't recommend you defy a request from the OR - it will only perpetuate any problems, and may lead to the imposition of Bankruptcy Restrictions Orders and delays in your discharge. Bankruptcy is a formal legal process so you have a duty to cooperate with such requirements.

timross wrote: »

Does the official receiver review your outgoings by looking at bank statements and receipts etc annually? Will I have to deal with this witch every year?

The OR may well hold a periodic review, whether yearly or at different intervals, to assess whether the level of your contributions should change. She will request in any case that you make her aware of any changes in your financial situation, be they good or bad.

Good luck

Dennis
@natdebtline

tigerfeet2006

If you are not happy with your case worker then you can make a complaint to the assistant OR.

When you go bankrupt and own a business then it is usual practice to have a face to face interview so her asking for a f2f is not in anyway unusual and it is infact the norm.

If you do not co-operate then the OR can apply to court to suspend your discharge and you will remain BR until such time that you do co-operate.

Some OR will ask for a review of your SoA at 6 months or just before discharge. Sometimes not at all. However you are legally obliged to tell the OR of any changes in income during the BR and the IPA. Whether that be an increase or a reduction and the OR change your IPA to suit either up, down or suspend payments. The suspended payments count towards the 36 months.

The OR will not routinely go through your bank statements or papers during your BR year but if the OR's office think for any reson you are not playing fair then they can do so.

timross

I had the business two years ago, and found out about the deception once I was made permanent and about to start year 2 of medical school

thanks for the information, I will go to the interview, she was just very cold and abrupt, I didn't expect to hear her threaten me with extra restrictions by HMRC - what can those extra restrictions be? barring me from being a director for a few more years?

alastairq

and I should have taken my responsibility as a director of my own limited company more seriously and she would ask HMRC to consider additional restrictions of between 2 and 15 years against me

she was just very cold and abrupt, I didn't expect to hear her threaten me with extra restrictions by HMRC - what can those extra restrictions be? barring me from being a director for a few more years?

She is referring to Bankruptcy Restriction Orders/Undertakings. She may have felt obliged to inform you of the downsides of BR. It is possible she only required the basic facts of your situation, rather than chapter & verse...this can be left for the F2F interview?

Unfortunately you will need to re-live your experience...and may well do so many times before you can truly put this situation behind you.

What sort of conduct could lead the official receiver to apply for a BRO against me?
When deciding whether to make a BRO, the court may take into account your conduct before and after the date of the bankruptcy order, so the official receiver will be looking closely at all your conduct.

Below you will find some examples of dishonest or blameworthy conduct that the official receiver could give as evidence in their report to court. This is not a complete list, but includes:

• Incurring debts that you knew you had no reasonable chance of repaying.
• Giving away assets or selling them at less than their value.
• Deliberately paying off some creditors in preference to others.
• Gambling or making rash speculations or being unreasonably extravagant.
• Failing to keep or produce records that would explain a loss of money or property.
• Fraud or fraudulent breach of trust.
• Causing your debts to increase by neglecting your business affairs.
• Failing to supply goods or services that have been paid for.
• Carrying on a business when you knew or ought to have known you could not pay your debts.

The more blameworthy your conduct, in the court’s opinion, the longer the BRO is likely to last.

From the stickies at the top of this forum, an official explanation of the sorts of prior conduct that may lead to a BRO/BRU being sought?

The above may well go some way to explaining the OR's apparent attitude, or your misunderstanding of it?

timross

No, I haven't done any of those things. I lived in Dover and worked in London, 5 hour daily commute, came home and took care of my wheelchair bound partner. I couldn't do everything so he took care of the finances because he was home all day unable to work and being from a traveller background, proceeded to open secret accounts and send the money there instead of paying tax although I would get regular reports that accounts were sent off to the accountant and tax paid, bills paid, credit cards paid, all I had to do was work and study - i'm now in year three of med school


She told me it was my responsibility to look after my own finances. It wasn't like a business where I was selling something, I was an IT contractor, going to an office and getting paid, it was fairly straightforward, the same pay every week, no fluctuation in expenses or income, I didn't think it would be too difficult. He even had me collecting receipts for cabs, IT books, training courses, printer cartidges and paper - the lot - and none of it was ever filed. He closed the company without ever filing a single self assessment but told me it was all done and paid. And the money went to his own private account, then to another then to another probably, and he's disabled and not earning so he isn't obliged to pay me back anything and legally he doesn't have to, because it was a joint account he convinced me to open.


It wasn't intentionally sneaky on my behalf, I did everything honestly and from the heart, but trusted the wrong person and really got stung.

alastairq

When someone operates a business, the LAw expects them to act in a responsible manner towards that business.

Duties and responsibilities....there really is no escaping them.

The situation between you & your partner with regards to this business remains just that, between you & them.

If you have 'evidence' of misdeeds, then you will be expected to pursue them.

But, ''I didn't know'' really doesn't wash when it comes to what the Law expects and demands.

It's the same with a Driving Licence.....people treat it as a travel pass, often [quite innocently, too] without realising the huge responsibilities which are involved with holding that driving licence.

Wait & see what happens now, with the face-to-face interview?