I split with my partner 2.5 years ago and at the time we had a house together and becuase we had a child together i decided to give her my equity to provide the child a home and i walked away from the relationship with no money.
After a failed business i am needing to go in to an IVA or BR and was looking to get some advice on what time frame is accepted for the equity not to taken in to consideration for my previous partners home?
I'm not sure whether you would need to take this into account,but I do suggest that you phone an Insolvency Practitioner as soon as possible and they will be able to assist you.
Check out www.iva.com where you will find lists of IP's. Alternatively, you could use one of the experts who post on here. Melanie Giles comes highly recommended, or there are debt advisors such as Andy Davie or VikiW who could help you with initial advise. They will tell you all your options.
Sharing from experiences of dealing with debt
The greatness of a man is not in how much wealth he acquires, but in his integrity and his ability to affect those around him positively.
Bob Marley. http://kallis3.blogs.iva.co.uk
Was there a formal transfer of the equity, or are you still registered as an owner of the property? If the transfer was effected in lieu of ongoing child support, then this may be deemed to be a valid transaction, but could you let me know te amount of equity which was in the property when you effected the transfer and what you feel may be in the property now.
Also whether you documented at the time that you have reliquished any claim on the property whether a formal transfer was done or not. It is not always clear as to whether this would be an acceptable position if you were insolvent at the time of "giving up" whatever interest you had in the property. It may well be that you need to take formal legal advice on this point. As to whether you can do an IVA - well speak to an Insolvency Practitioner asap.
Regards, David Mond, Insolvency Practitioner for over 46 years. Personal Insolvency Practitioner of the year 2012, Personal Insolvency Practitioner of the year finalist 2013 & 2014 awarded by Insolvency & Rescue Magazine and 2015 finalist for Personal Insolvency Firm of the Year.
The law relating to transactions at undervalue provides for all transactions which have occured during the five years prior to a bankruptcy order to be subject to scrutiny. Of that period, insolvency does have to be proven for transactions which occured in the 2-5 year period, whereas insolvency is assumed for those transactions within the last two years.
In this posters case, insolvency would therefore have to be proven if this transaction were to be challengeable.
There may be an argument that as the transaction may have been with a former partner/associate - ie a spouse, then it may also not be necesssary to prove insolvency - but the law as to whether unmarried partners are deemed to be associates is a little grey. Taking the act literally, it just relates to husbands, wives or civil partners - so if there was no formal relationship in place it is unlikely that this could be argued in this case.
Last edited by MelanieGiles on Fri Jan 02, 2009 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you were solvent at the time then the transaction/transfer would be fine.
Regards, David Mond, Insolvency Practitioner for over 46 years. Personal Insolvency Practitioner of the year 2012, Personal Insolvency Practitioner of the year finalist 2013 & 2014 awarded by Insolvency & Rescue Magazine and 2015 finalist for Personal Insolvency Firm of the Year.
