| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
David F
New Member
United Kingdom
58 Posts |
 Posted - 04 September 2010 : 18:00:12
|
Hi All,
I am looking for some advice.
I have received a letter today from my OR stating that they are holding a General Meeting of my creditors at the end of this month. I went BR in early March of this year and so far all I have heard from my OR is that my car and pensions are exempt of my BR.
The letter states that I am NOT required to attend so what is the purpose of this meeting?
The only remaining asset that has not yet been dealt with is my house. The OR wrote to me back in April asking if I wanted to buy back the BI and to send in a valuation and mortgage redemption statement. I submitted a surveyors valuation and a redemption statement that showed a negative equity of £300 and expressed my wish to purchase back the BI ASAP. Since then I have heard nothing until today.
One other point I should mention is that I managed to get a copy of the original creditors report produced by the OR back in May of this year. (I got a copy as my parents were named as unsecured creditors). In this report the OR explained the reasons for my BR (basically living off credit after a long period of unemployment) the only asset was my house which they stated in their report had no equity and that they did not envisage any creditor receiving any monies from my estate. It also went on to state that they did not intend to call a creditors meeting, so why call one now?
Should I be concerned by this recent letter or is it all just a standard procedure in the process of my BR?
Many Thanks in advance for any help/advice offered.
David |
|
|
RHB
Senior Member
1159 Posts |
Posted - 04 September 2010 : 19:17:49
|
| Does seem a bit odd. Do you think that they might think there is some value in your property now? |
 |
|
|
David F
New Member
United Kingdom
58 Posts |
Posted - 05 September 2010 : 21:31:23
|
Hi RHB,
Possibly yes but not much, a couple of thousand max.
I plan to phone my OR tomorrow and see if I can get some insight in to what is going on.
I'll post again once I know more.
|
|
|
|
David F
New Member
United Kingdom
58 Posts |
Posted - 06 September 2010 : 13:29:32
|
Hi again,
I have spoken with my OR this morning and apparently the OR has called the meeting of creditors because he was unable to attain all of the creditors agreement to my valuation of the house. It was always the OR's plan to accept my valuation of negative equity but apparently 1 creditor has appointed their own insolvency practioner and had a drive by valuation done and therefore do not agree with the negative equity valuation. To ensure fairness the OR has called this meeting to enable the creditors to vote on the OR's plan or to appoint an insolvency practitioner.
This is not good news as far as I can see and I am now really fed up as I thought after 6 months I was coming towards the home stretch.
What does it mean if they appoint an insolvency practioner, do I have to go through the whole process again of being interviewed and having the ins and outs of my finances being picked through once more as I thought I had put all that behind me.
What I don't understand is that my valuation for my house was carried out by a chartered surveyor and it showed a negative equity of a few hundred pounds. If this creditors drive by valuation is much higher what is the process I will have to go though.
I am really upset by this as I researched my options to death before deciding on BR and no where did it say that the creditors could be appointed as trustee if they didn't agree with the OR's decision.
I feel like i'm right back at square one and my creditors are still able to give me a kick and squeeze every last drop of blood out of me, even in BR.
|
|
|
|
RHB
Senior Member
1159 Posts |
Posted - 06 September 2010 : 13:46:32
|
| Well in BR the idea isn't just to give you a clean slate but also to give creditors the best possible return. I suppose if the drive by valuation showed enough equity to make selling an option then that is why they want an IP involved. By going BR you do lose control of your assets but if there is only a few hundred or thousand in it I am sure you will be able to get the BI back. |
|
|
|
Bigal4787
forum expert
United Kingdom
641 Posts |
Posted - 13 September 2010 : 01:05:54
|
The difference in your valuation, and the drive by valuation by one of your creditors must be substantial for them to do this( who was the creditor, which IP acts for them as I found some of them to be questionable in their methods)
Up until the 23rd July, I was an examiner with the insolvency service. I generally found that if I had to offer a case to an IP from the local offices rota for IP's, 99% of them would not take on a case if the equity in the property was £10,000 or less, as by the time the OR's costs, and other fees were taken out the IP would receive very little from taking it on.
But as stated previously, if the equity is low you do have the option of someone buying out your BI.
Big Al |
|
|
|
Reviva UK
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2452 Posts |
Posted - 13 September 2010 : 08:42:33
|
Hi Bigal
I am starting to see a number of similar cases arise where there clearly is no equity and no prospect of an IPA.
However where there is one large creditor that can request an IP this practice is on the increase.
I half wonder if some industrious firm of IP's has some agreement with a major creditor and they are going after the charge on property or 3 year review instead.
Makes no difference to the creditor if they do so on a no win no fee type basis, but obviously commercial in some cases.
interested for other feedback
David - really suggest you follow the course of action we spoke about and hopefully that will be sufficient.
Paul Johns
Bankruptcy Specialists
Reviva UK
www.revivauk.com
08454 751 851
Real People ..... Real Debt Solutions |
|
|
|
BTBgoesbust
Starting Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
Posted - 13 September 2010 : 10:57:41
|
Hi Bigal,
Very interested reading your thoughts on this as I may be in a similar situation in that we are arguing an equity exoneration situation. In my case the IP has a vested interest in arguing against it as without it the equity in the house is negligable and hence their fee recovery will be much lower.
In essence therefore this represents a clear conflict of interest on the part of the IP! It will be interesting to see how it progresses as to date I have not heard from them.
Regards, D
What's happened has happened - need to move on! |
|
|
|
Reviva UK
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
2452 Posts |
Posted - 13 September 2010 : 12:55:00
|
Hi D
Spoke to Tenon this morning so I will drop you a line - don't think they are after the same thing as I have mentioned above
Paul
Paul Johns
Bankruptcy Specialists
Reviva UK
www.revivauk.com
08454 751 851
Real People ..... Real Debt Solutions |
|
|
|
Bigal4787
forum expert
United Kingdom
641 Posts |
Posted - 14 September 2010 : 00:14:24
|
It would seem that some creditors and certain IP's may be going down this route purely to prevent someone buying out the BI where there is negative equity for £1, they would then have 3 years to deal with it,or obtain a charging order, however my understanding from the technical manual is that only the OR as trustee could extend the 3 year period, not an IP appointed as trustee.
Big Al |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
General Meeting of Creditors?
