Hi Catherine
You are possibly now confused having been told two different things,my post was just to give you information as I give to others however my postings are obviously not welcome on this forum as this is not the first time my posts have attempted to be discredited by Kallis, with a one liner, when I have taken the time to explain something which is correct. What I have said Catherine is right and I leave you with an extract from the technical manual which verifies the information I have given to you, Good Luck and signing out, The Major.
http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/freedomofi ... Orders.htm
If the bankrupt is in receipt of benefit and other income, and has surplus income above that required to meet his/her reasonable domestic needs, the official receiver should still consider the possibility of obtaining an income payments order. Any calculation to identify surplus income should include all available income, including state benefits, which includes child tax credit. The only exception to the inclusion of state benefits in an income payments calculation is where a bankrupt is in receipt of child benefit, which is not an income based benefit (unlike child tax credit).
It is the income from the sources other than the benefit(s) which is providing the payments under an IPO, so if the bankrupt is in receipt of benefits and has surplus income, an IPO contribution should only be sought to the extent of the non-benefit income.
An IPO should not be sought where the bankrupt’s only source of income is state benefit payments. It is unlikely that where a bankrupt’s income solely comprises state benefits any surplus will arise, the exception to this is where the bankrupt is in receipt of non-means tested benefits, such as Disability Living Allowance.
If a bankrupt who is solely in receipt of benefits has surplus income and has agreed to contribute on a voluntary basis, no enforcement action can be taken if the bankrupt fails to make agreed voluntary payments, and voluntary payments cannot be enforced via an IPO.
