I'm Not Allowed to Go Bankrupt

maxmycardagain

your startup investment and costs will probably wipe out any first year trading profits

anyway, i cant see why not earning enough stops you goung BR mate, thats the whole point, if we earned loads we would pay our debts!

wba31

debt_doctor wrote: »

Hi,

Im sorry I find the 'advice' from CCCS on this particular occassion very bizzare, and im not sure I see the point. Banks is clearly insolvent, making BR a good choice. Most people who go BR are in 'negative' regarding their income and outgoings.

Banks needs to address his income situation by clarifying the minimum wage issue ( it is not true to say that being on min wage causes problems with tax credits ), and applying for tax credit and other benefits as neccessary.

Many people have to live on income support after BR, I did myself for a while. Its not much fun ( as some of you will know ) getting by on £ 60.15 pw if your over 25 and single, but at least you wont have the millstone and pressure of lots of debt around your neck, and should hopefully have your housing and council tax covered.

Banks if you post all your info about age, hours worked, etc etc then we will work through it.

PS Max was right about reporting the min wage.

Best

DD

If someone goes bankrupt with a major deficit in their priority living costs alone, how do you expect them to maintain these costs following bankruptcy and no access to credit? NDL, CAB and CCCS should want to see people pretty much sorted for life, if they advise people to go bankrupt regardless, only for people to struggle following bankruptcy because the budget isnt sorted, and then run up debt to come back to them, these "charities" probably aren't really charities, as they aren't helping people! i once spoke to a representative from Christians Against Property who said it was their desire to be out of a job, as in debt issues get sorted so no-one needs help and these charities become irrelevant. its a long shot but a good dream to have.
i personally believe that the budget should be addressed first, otherwise bankruptcy will only solve the short term problem, but potentially make things worse long term.

maxmycardagain

hello, logic check time

the OP cant pay current debts anyway, when the CCJ's roll in and the baillifs come knocking it wont get easier will it

the OP needs to get his finances sorted incomewise now, and go BR asap before it comes on top.

but to say BR would be REFUSED is not correct, my own income was in a minus situation, no-one asked or commented on mine.

wba31

Im sure if BR is the option then the advice agency would say that, but they probably want to see the whole situation dealt with first. it might not be that easy for the OP to make up the deficit on the budget. and if the expenditure is just rent, bills, food, with no avoidable costs, how could someone expect the OP to meet these with the deficit. until this point they are possibly living off credit.
with regards to CCJ's, yes these would happen, but token payment offers can be made, and am i right in believing that if it goes as far as bailiffs, the bailiffs brings with them an N245?
If they were told bankruptcy would be refused, the advisor could have been wrong, but they advice agencies do have to be careful, as it is peoples lives they are dealing with. as i said above, they would probably prefer to sort the budget FIRST, so they know they are hopefully providing a long term solution

uhuru_2

If the OP has debts over £750 and he isn't paying them any of his creditors could and probably would make him bankrupt. I suspect CCCS are saying that he needs to increase his income before bankruptcy to prevent a subsequent bankruptcy, not that the judge would refuse bankruptcy effectively because he was 'too insolvent'. If the OP can make minimal payments to his creditors this should hopefully prevent one of them making him bankrupt long enough for him to increase his income enough to cover his minimum expense after he petitions for his own bankruptcy.

DelhiBelly_2

I think that the point most people are trying to make is that bankruptcy should be viewed as a permanent solution to a person's financial difficulties and with a £750 deficit on income & expenditure every month this is not going to be the case for BSW. Bankruptcy should bring a huge sense of relief of knowing that finances are back on an even keel but TBH BSW will wake up the next day knowing that he still doesn't have enough money to pay his priority debts and essential payments and is likely to be repossessed because he can't afford his mortgage and will struggle to feed himself. Whilst I am not suggesting that continuing to use credit to supplement his income is a good long term plan, I think there are times when needs must and I would agree that putting the bankruptcy on hold until BSW can sort his income and expenditure out is reasonable advice.

You do need to look at two things fairly urgently though; Is your business sustainable or should you be looking for paid employment instead and do you intend to try and keep the property?