Thanks

Hi Can a discharged bankrupt reclaim mis sold PPI and if there was a balance owing at the time of BR can any refund be offset against the balance owing? Thanks

HMRC breaches disability rules over bankruptcy Officers failed their duties to disabled woman A high court has annulled a bankruptcy order, made on the petition of HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) against a disabled woman, after the body breached disability rules. The court in Manchester annulled the order against Nicola Haworth after finding that HMRC had failed in its duties to Haworth, as a disabled person, under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). This was the first time a court had considered a public authority’s duties under the DDA in the area of insolvency. In wider implications for the profession, the court left open the question of whether a trustee in bankruptcy is also a public authority, who owes duties to the bankrupt under the DDA, and whether his or her costs and expenses could be reduced if such duties are breached. The background to the case (Nicola Haworth v Donna Cartmel) was that Haworth had sustained physical injuries in an accident during her 20s. She also suffered from anxiety and depression, and had a phobia of opening mail, particularly official letters. Haworth had bred Arabian horses as a therapeutic hobby, from which she derived no income. But in 2005 an anonymous letter to HMRC claimed that Haworth was receiving more than £100,000 a year from her horse breeding “commercial enterprise.” Tax officers then wrote to Haworth to request tax returns. When no returns were received, HMRC assessed that she owed more than £192,000 in tax. Haworth’s benefits were stopped and the petition from HMRC was later made against her. Haworth’s mother told HMRC of her daughters’ disability in 2007. But when HMRC served Haworth with a statutory demand on May 2 2008, her mental condition prevented her from opening the envelope. She also lacked the capacity to deal with the bankruptcy proceedings instigated by the petition, but Haworth was made bankrupt on August 29 2008. The court found that HMRC failed to make reasonable adjustments as required under the DDA. Officers could have made contact with Haworth’s mother and waited for provision of a medical report before taking action. The court also found that HMRC should also have considered alternative enforcement methods.

UK banks write-off record £17bn Bad credit card debts rise in 2010 By Insolvency News, 18 April 2011. Posted in Industry UK banks wrote off a record £17.3bn of bad debts in 2010, an eight per cent increase on 2009’s figure of £16.1bn. Research by finance broker Syscap claims the increase was partly due to a 29 per cent rise in bad credit card debt. This totalled £5.32bn, a rise from £4.12bn last year. Syscap says this makes a rebound in levels of bank lending unlikely in the near future. Philip White, chief executive of Syscap, says small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) should look towards leasing as a way to raise capital as it is less of a drain on banks’ balance sheets. White said: “SMEs that are looking to expand, create jobs and invest are going to find getting a conventional loan from a bank a hard slog. Businesses will find it easier to raise capital investment by securing funds against that asset through leasing rather then by getting a normal loan.” Figures from the Finance and Leasing Association show that total asset finance provided to businesses, in the three months to February, increased by 20 per cent on the same period last year. White added: “We have banks lining up to provide our clients with funds through leasing, but those same customers would really struggle to get competitively priced conventional bank loans. “Funding raised through leasing does not impact on a business’ credit lines. That will give the company more headroom to borrow additional funds when they need it in the future. Most leasing arrangements, unlike loans, do not have a negative impact on a balance sheet.”

Insolvency Service to hike bankruptcy petition fees Deposits on bankruptcy petitions rise to £525 By Insolvency News, 19 April 2011. Posted in Industry The Insolvency Service is set to increase bankruptcy petition fees on June 1 2011. For debtors, the deposit on a bankruptcy petition will increase from £450 to £525 and the creditor deposit will increase by £100 to £700. The creditor’s deposit on a winding up petition will also rise from £1,000 to £1,165. A spokesperson for the Insolvency Service said: “We accept that the increase in the deposit that must be paid for a bankruptcy petition will not be welcome for those who find themselves in financial difficulty and for whom bankruptcy is the only option.” Changes will not be made to administration fees in bankruptcy and company cases. There will also be no increase to the secretary of state or fee band charges. The spokesperson added: “The deposit paid on a petition by a debtor is only a contribution of the cost of administering bankruptcy cases with the balance being provided from the recovery of assets. The overall cost of administering a bankruptcy case has not increased since 2007.” The Insolvency Service also pointed out that there are alternative insolvency measures to bankruptcy for individuals with little surplus income, few assets and less then £15,000 worth of debt. These include Debt Relief Orders that were introduced on April 6 2009.

Basically IP's earn very little out of IVA's and know even less regarding the law concerning enforceability. They will not take the time and trouble to challenge enforceability and will just take the figures given by the loan/cc company. I have spoken to an IP about this and challenging lawfulness of the debt and they said that it really wasn't worth the effort as even if the debt is proved unenforceable the debt still stands just can't be enforced without a court order

All debts have to be declared to the OR and this includes the mortgage. Is there any equity in the property? If so the other person on the mortgage can apply to the OR to buy the beneficial interest in it from them. The cost will depend on the amount of equity. To advise any further will neeed to know more i.e. amount of total debts, equity in property, any other assets. Are you employed? Personally I have found few IVA's work but again is dependant on individual circumstances

Unfortunately they can. Went to a case about 3 weeks ago and in the first instance the Judge said the same - that they couldn't have it both ways. The claimants solicitor came up with some case law which showed they could and the Judge had to allow it.

And you kep up with the mortgage payments. Is it a joint mortgage or in your sole name?

Either way he's not liable. Not sure if it's worth pointing this out to the LL at this stage. He thinks has a guarantor to fall back on it's giving him some 'comfort' with the fact that it's there and it's something he can use against you. Keep paying what you can towards the arrears.

My initial thoughts were that if the debt has been incurred post bankruptcy he will be liable for it. However, after some research it seems that this is not correct. Although the liability did not in this case, crystalise until after the guarantor's discharge, the liability would be classed as a 'Contingent' liability as of the date of the guarantor's bankruptcy and would therefore have fallen into his bankrupt estate in accordance with Section 382 of the Act. Technically, the guarantor should have declared the liability on his bankruptcy paperwork, but the Law would determine the matter only in accordance with the Insolvency legislation. So it would semm he is not liable

No they will be included as they were accrued pre-bankruptcy

If you don't need the company anymore and it has never traded apply t Companies House to have it struck off. You will also need to tell CH that you are doing this as they are a creditor

If you've signed a PG on the Lease yes you will be liable for the remaining renatl payments (assumiing the PG is legally valid). Going BR would remove this personal liability. Would need to know more about your personal situation to know if you would lose your house. Is there any equity in it?

Did you write to all creditors prior to applying for the strike off informing them that is what you intended to do? If not write to CH and find out who has objected and write and inform them that the company has ceasd trading and has no assets and invite them to eitherr remove theor objection to the strike-off or apply for the company to be wound up. If they apply for a wind-up the OR willbe appointed as Liquidator and you will responsible for delivering all books and records of the company to the OR and attending an interview to explain the history of the company and why it became insolvent. Sounds scary but if you have nothing to hide (i.e O/D DLA) you should have noting to worry about

From the facts presented I woulod say you do not have a BI in the property and even if the OR thought different the figures are so small it really wouldn't be worth their time or effort chasing it or seeking some sort of paymentf for it

On the facts presented here it would seem that you do not have a right of set off.. To have a right of set off you need to be able to prove that this is a business practice that has been used between you and the Limited Company previoulsy (even if it is your own Ltd Co.). In this case it would seem that this is not the case. Try and do a deal with the IP if you can. Offer him 25% of what is owed and tell him that's all you've got.

You have to declare the share of the house in the bankruptcy. Get one of the family members to buy her beneficial interest in the property which will be a lot cheaper than the open market value as it would be too messy for the OR to forcee the sale with 3 other interested parties involved

Just keep paying it. Whilst your paying it it shows an intention to clear the debt and they won't get so heavy with you. The problem with you showing willingness to pay is that they will pressure you to pay more. Stick to your guns and only pay what you can afford. I know it seems daunting dealing with a big Government department but don't be bullied by them. There is a long way to go before they can take the business and your home and as long as your paying the chances of this happening diminish

Keep paying the £600 a week even if you don't have their agreement. Keep a record of all payments. The debt will be paid off within 2 years and as long as your keeping up with your present HMRC payments I can't see them going for bankruptcy.

No they can't chase you. The debt is owed by the limited Company and not you personally. Have they threatended you with Court or the Company? Write to them telling them the Company's disolved and tell them to check Companies House website for clarification

Susan Ok it all makes a bit more sense taking out that post.What is the situation with regards to the strike off you submitted? I know HMRC objected but have a look on Companies House website and see what the status of the company is. Does it say 'proposal to strike off'? Just because it HMRC have objected doesn't mean that it won't go through as they have to prove the debt. Obvioulsy this is fairly easy now that the accounts have been submitted but is still worth checking. Persoanlly I wouldn't have bothered having the accounts finalised or filed but what's done is done. Next if the strike off is not live you are going to have to start at the beginning again on this.You need to write to all creditors stating that the Company has ceased to trade and has insufficient funds to appoint a Liqudator and invite them to issue winding up proceedings themselves. If the Company is not subjet to winding up proceedings state that you intend to apply for a strike off after three months from the date of the letter under s1003 of the Companies Act. HMRC may or may not object to the strike off again but either way you have sent the letter to them as required by law and if they do just send a letter to Companies House showing them that you intended to apply for a strike off.and all creditors have been informed of this With regards to CCCS don't even bother getting into it with them. Just tell them that the company has no assets and has ceased to trade and put the phone down. They will harrass you for a bit but will get the message eventually Hope it makes sense. Need any more info just shout

Ok will do thanks for the advise

Have receeived a fixed penalty notice from the Police today with an offence code of 138. Have tried searching for it and can't find out what it is. Anyone any ideas?

That's basically what the set aside application was. It was unenforceable so CO shouldn't have been sanctioned