| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| m88 |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 08:59:38
can your case be passed to RTLU if you have no assets |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| m88 |
Posted - 29 December 2009 : 09:37:25
my case has now been passed to leeds from rtlu,is there any significance
|
| m88 |
Posted - 27 December 2009 : 12:49:48
thanks again
|
| debtinfo |
Posted - 27 December 2009 : 11:51:16
I wouldnt worry about it, it seems that that your case is progressing well |
| debtinfo |
Posted - 27 December 2009 : 11:50:16
for individuals, an assosiate is a family member or a person you are in business with.
A friend is not an associate as it is too difficult to define a friend in law |
| m88 |
Posted - 27 December 2009 : 10:19:01
associate,been a friend or someone i know?
|
| m88 |
Posted - 27 December 2009 : 10:14:23
thanks
|
| John |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 22:11:41
Hi m88
debtinfo makes a valid point.
As the preferential payment was made to a non associate it is not likely to be investigated as a 6 month time limit immediately prior to bankruptcy applies whereas a the time limit is 2 years if the alleged preferred payment is made to an associate.
That said, I'm not sure the differentiation should apply.
Additionally there is case precedent to suggest that where the recipient is an associate the onus is on the trustee to prove the recipient was aware of the potential bankruptcy of the payee for the payment to be deemed by the court as preferential.
John White
Independent Debt Consultant
Specialising in Bankruptcy |
| debtinfo |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 20:45:52
They will not reclaim the money as as a preference only applies for 6 months prior to the bankruptcy for a non associate, not 2 years |
| m88 |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 16:27:59
and thanks john for your time
|
| m88 |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 15:49:42
will they deal directly with vatman ,or will i be involved ,and will this effect chance of ED or length before poss ED is given,
|
| John |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 15:46:40
Hi
Oh is see, well if already with RTLU the they will likely deal with it, if they don't then they are clearly failing in their duty to ensure ALL creditors are in receipt of the correct pro rata payment from your estate.
Although perfectly innocently carried out at the time, the fact that the VAT payment was made within 2 years of the date of bankruptcy makes it a preferred payment which should be reclaimed and dispersed pro rata.
John White
Independent Debt Consultant
Specialising in Bankruptcy |
| m88 |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 15:39:39
told OR all about it ,got letter about poss ED,case now with RTLU, are they likely to look into it (sale aug2008)BR aug 2009
|
| John |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 15:34:47
Hi
my guess is the OR will deal with it as
a) the preferred payee will not put up too much of a fight to retain the £20
b) the reclaimed sum will ensure the OR covers all costs relating to your case prior to dispersal of the balance as part of your estate.
However, yet another factor will be the workload of the particular OR's office at this time.
John White
Independent Debt Consultant
Specialising in Bankruptcy |
| m88 |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 14:00:29
got £20000 agreed to pay v.at.man all money to clear v.at and N.I around a year before BR.
|
| John |
Posted - 26 December 2009 : 13:56:32
Hi
it may depend on the sum of money realised by the property sale and the sum paid in VAT. Other factors may include the total number of creditors involved as this will impact on the amount of administrative work needed to resolve the preferred payment.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility, although perhaps unlikely, that a private sector trustee could be appointed if the sum involved is large enough.
Whosoever deals with this issue should make no difference to you personally as the monies realised is, of course, part of your estate and thus lost in bankruptcy.
John White
Independent Debt Consultant
Specialising in Bankruptcy |
