Kirsty v HSBC

[jonni2bad]

Perhaps this might help...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-643026.html

[kc_31]

Thanks for that. Unfortunately I don't understand all of it but I think that would be relevant if I was still bankrupt. I was discharged in February 2006 so as far as I understand things, I don't actually owe anyone any money now. So if I no longer owe them anything how can they offset my claim agiainst it?

 

Thanks again,

Kirsty.

[joneshousehold]

kc, I have only a little bit of understanding of bankruptcy and I suggest you have a search for people who give advice on the forum about it. Jonni's link is a good one and if you try searching for bankruptcy and windfall together you may find a few more.

 

My understanding of bankruptcy is that no one creditor can take precedence over the others. The money would normally go to the Receiver unless you are discharged. I don't know what happens then but I think this is the windfall part. I think the Receiver has to be told and he decides whether to distribute the money.

 

I also have a vague recollection that it is unlawful or an offence to arrange for one creditor to receive a larger share than the others but that may be before discharge. If that is the case then it really is very naughty of the solicitors to suggest this option. They should know better!

 

Do some research and then work out your arguments. If my vague recollection is correct I would be inclined to point this out to the solicitors and remind them that as a firm of solicitors they should be very well aware of it. You could even suggest reporting them to the Law Society or whoever it is that governs their actions.