|
|
 |
 |
FORUM |
|
> Browse and post on our forum |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
|
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Essie |
Posted - 19 June 2011 : 21:50:43
Hi all,
Please can you help me with a question....
I'm thinking of maybe moving in with my bf.
What are the rules regarding food shopping? How much is it for one person and how much is allowed for two? He isn't BR so br it doesn't matter what he spends does it? I wasn't sure how the OR calculates these things when there are two people (one BR, one not).
Also... the bf has x2 children. Can this be taken into account? or does he have to pay for their food?? I'm confused and need help!!
Many thanks
E
Finally got head out of sand in October 2010
BR March 2011
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Essie |
Posted - 30 June 2011 : 22:19:13
Sorry guys,
Getting back to my earlier question... the OR ask what my bfs income is in order to establish that he is paying a fair proportion. Will they accept his income after he has made CSA payments or will they use the full income figure? If they don't take into account the CSA it is not a true representation of his income.
Also, will they def let me contribute towards the bfs children??
Thanks tons,
Charlotte
Finally got head out of sand in October 2010
BR March 2011
|
| Bigal4787 |
Posted - 24 June 2011 : 15:06:41
The household expenses are based on meeting the reasonable domestic expenses of the bankrupt, excessive amounts on cigarettes and alcohol, would not be seen as a reasonable domestic expenditure.
But what your partner spends his money on is of no concern to the OR, if he isn't bankrupt, however the assessment for an IPA takes into consideration your income and your partner's income, so say for instance with regards to total household income, you provide 40% of it and your partner 60%, the IPA calculator that the OR uses, will assume that you pay 40% of any household expenditure, e.g rent/mortgage £600 per month, the OR will assume that you pay £240 towards the rent/mortgage and so on,regardless of what your partner spends the money on.
You also mentioned obtaining a loan to pay off gambling debts, depending on how much,when and what type of gambling the OR would delve into that a bit deeper, as it could lead to them seeking a BRO(bankruptcy restriction order), to basically extend the restrictions on you for 2 - 15 years.
Big Al
Insolvency examiner with the Insolvency service from April 2008 - July 2010.
If you need help completing SOA's(statement of affairs) or PIQ's(preliminary information questionnaire) if you've been declared bankrupt, or anything else and you're within 30 miles or so of Warrington, then please contact me via my contact details in the expert page for futher details"
|
| Alina Pietrzyk |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 20:29:03
quote:
Originally posted by Alina Pietrzyk
quote:
Originally posted by debtinfo
The OR will be interested in how the debts are run up yes, YOU SHOULD NEVER LIE TO THE OR, that is perjury.
However only person liabile remains liable they wont transfer the liability say if you paid for his living.
BUT
There are certain bankruptcy offences where if you prefered one creditor over the other or gave money away under certain conditions that could lead the OR to recover the money from the person it was given to or preferenced along with certain axtra restrictions for the bankrupt
Perjury! Perjury is only perjury if you can be shown to have lied. I've no problem with giving the OR the whole sordid story. As I say, I begged to be able to deal wih the mortgage and phoned A****** N******* who refused to listen to me and allowed the house to be repossessed from under my feet.
I don't understand your other comments. All that matters is that I and I alone am liable for my debts in my name and if that just so happens to suit our situation, so be it. Rejoice!
Nor do I understand the extra action business you refer to. I have so far paid all my credit cards and loans and am not in default, and have not negotiated anything with any company ever, let alone to the detriment of another creditor. They have always been paid - for so many years. Now it is getting difficult.
And I have never had anything to give away to anybody.
|
| Alina Pietrzyk |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 20:22:07
quote:
Originally posted by debtinfo
The OR will be interested in how the debts are run up yes, YOU SHOULD NEVER LIE TO THE OR, that is perjury.
However only person liabile remains liable they wont transfer the liability say if you paid for his living.
BUT
There are certain bankruptcy offences where if you prefered one creditor over the other or gave money away under certain conditions that could lead the OR to recover the money from the person it was given to or preferenced along with certain axtra restrictions for the bankrupt
Perjury! Perjury is only perjury if you can be shown to have lied. I've no problem with giving the OR the whole sordid story. As I say, I begged to be able to deal wih the mortgage and phoned A****** N******* who refused to listen to me and allowed the house to be repossessed from under my feet.
I don't understand your other comments. All that matters is that I and I alone am liable for my debts in my name and if that just so happens to suit our situation, so be it. Rejoice!
Nor do I understand the extra action business you refer to. I have so far paid al my credit cards and loans and am not in default, and have not negotiated anything with any company ever, let alone to the detriment of another creditor. They have always been paid - for so many years. Now it is getting difficult. |
| debtinfo |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 19:33:37
The OR will be interested in how the debts are run up yes, YOU SHOULD NEVER LIE TO THE OR, that is perjury.
However only person liabile remains liable they wont transfer the liability say if you paid for his living.
BUT
There are certain bankruptcy offences where if you prefered one creditor over the other or gave money away under certain conditions that could lead the OR to recover the money from the person it was given to or preferenced along with certain axtra restrictions for the bankrupt |
| Alina Pietrzyk |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 17:09:44
quote:
Originally posted by Traceyjr
Unfortunately if the debts are in your name then you are liable, not your partner, even if he was partly responsible for running up the debts.
Why do you say unfortunately? I think it very fortunate that only one of has to go bankrupt, as we will have more of his money to live ff, whatever it says on the Statement of Outgoings. |
| Skippy |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 16:26:31
Unfortunately if the debts are in your name then you are liable, not your partner, even if he was partly responsible for running up the debts.
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 - it's over at last! |
| Alina Pietrzyk |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 16:21:15
quote:
Originally posted by Viki.W
Hi Alina,
As the others have said, the non bankrupt partner needs to be paying his/her fair share but can do what they want with the rest of their money.
Viki Warbrooke
Vincent Bond & Co
If you would like free advice on all options available and help with your bankruptcy petition please contact me at http://www.vincentbond.com/about_us_Viki_Warbrooke.asp
Please read my experience of debt via my blog at http://vikiw.blogs.iva.co.uk/
OK thanks that's quite reassuring. But what if all the debts are in my name and my longterm partner has been as responsible as I have been for running them up over (literally) decades, are you saying the OR will not ask questions along those lines?
Can I lie and say "Oh no, I ran all the debt up myself, they are all only in my name and my partner cannot be held liable for them, I am the one going bankrupt, not him?!"
I thought I read somewhere that the powers that be will look into whether your partner had some responsibility for the debt even though they are all in my name. For instance I got a loan to pay off a gambling debt and I got another to offer a one-off final payment to A**** Nat***** when through his financial mismanagement our house was repossessed in 1997?
I begged him to let me take on the mortgage repayments at that time and he woke me up one morning to tell me we had lost the house.
That is all past history. Water under the bridge. BUT it's those kinds of problems that led to one debt after another, and my patching things up over the years, messily, but until recently just about affordably.
Of course it had to be in my name - he always claimed (perhaps correctly) that he would never get credit (even when it was more readily available).
On the up side we have not used the credit cards for 18 months, but a small inheritance kept us shored up for some of that time and is now all spent (mostly on booze).
|
| Viki.W |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 15:16:01
Hi Alina,
As the others have said, the non bankrupt partner needs to be paying his/her fair share but can do what they want with the rest of their money.
Viki Warbrooke
Vincent Bond & Co
If you would like free advice on all options available and help with your bankruptcy petition please contact me at http://www.vincentbond.com/about_us_Viki_Warbrooke.asp
Please read my experience of debt via my blog at http://vikiw.blogs.iva.co.uk/ |
| Skippy |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 14:28:09
When I went BR I wasn't asked for details of my partner's DI, only what he was contributing to the household expenditure. What the non BR partner does with their DI is down to them.
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 - it's over at last! |
| Alina Pietrzyk |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 14:21:09
quote:
Originally posted by Traceyjr
Someone who is BR cannot have any control over their partner's expenditure. However it's not unreasonable to expect the partner to pay their fair share towards the household expenditure.
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 - it's over at last!
But what if they do pay their "fair share", as you call it, it's the disposable income that I am talking about. It might look on paper like a bf has hundreds of pounds of spare money each month, but if £250 goes on fags, another few hundred on cider how is this fair to the bankrupt partner? |
| Skippy |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 13:47:50
Someone who is BR cannot have any control over their partner's expenditure. However it's not unreasonable to expect the partner to pay their fair share towards the household expenditure.
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 - it's over at last! |
| Alina Pietrzyk |
Posted - 23 June 2011 : 13:21:23
quote:
Originally posted by RHB
The CSA shouldn't be crippling him as the maximum he would be paying is 25% of his net wage if he has 3 or more children & less if he doesn't. Bills should really be proportionate to income, your creditors won't want to be subsidising him if you move in, but in all probability it should mean you would have more disposable income.
This doesn't sound too helpful. What control can a bankrupt have over a bf and hs expenditure? It is her bankruptcy not his. If my partner is a heavy smoker and drinker (alcoholic) and the OR says I must pay £ x a month disregarding my partner's actual contribtion to household expenses, how am I to pay the Income Payment Areement?
|
| RHB |
Posted - 22 June 2011 : 14:56:42
The CSA shouldn't be crippling him as the maximum he would be paying is 25% of his net wage if he has 3 or more children & less if he doesn't. Bills should really be proportionate to income, your creditors won't want to be subsidising him if you move in, but in all probability it should mean you would have more disposable income. |
| Essie |
Posted - 22 June 2011 : 00:54:21
Thank you. I'll go take a look.
Does anyone know my bf's Csa payments are taken into account when working out his actual salary? The Csa is crippling him ATM and if I told him he had to pay a greater proportion towards the bills than I do he Just won't b able to afford it.
Thanks again.
Finally got head out of sand in October 2010
BR March 2011
|
|
|
| bankruptcyhelp.org.uk Forum |
© bankruptcyhelp |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
