Is there anything I can do to prevent being forced to sell my home by public auction? I agreed to this term in my IVA as it was the only way I could get agreement. My mortgage is very high and they want me to sell so i can make faster payments. There is now some equity (15-20%) in my home but how can i release it with out selling?
To add some context - the numbers in my IVA are very large. I have pleaded with HMRC to not force me to sell my home, particularly at this time when it is the bottom of the market. I am and have been a higher rate tax payer for many years and I continue to be. Does this cut no ice at all? If they force me to sell my house I will move my business interests abroad and move out of the jurisdiction of HMRC - i will then repay my IVA faster out of the tax savings I am no longer paying HMRC under PAYE. since I do not want to sell or move. How does this solution benefit anyone? They gave me 2 years to sell but during that time the market was dead and i would have sold with 0 equity. Now, having waited there might be 15-20% equity. But how can i release that small amount without selling? They seem intent on forcing a public auction even though I am now marketing the house. Again a solution that will not benefit me or them. If I am forced out of my home I will also take/change my team with me. Mostly higher rate tax payers. I totally accept I got myself in this mess but I cannot see any logic for the crown in these actions.
Has your IP been involved in these discussions or has it just been yourself? I would have thought a variation to extend the term for sale would be appropriate and given the other potential losses to the Crown HMRC may agree to this. If you work from home you would need an office etc once the house has been sold so any savings would be lost to a new landlord so a sale for no reason seems pointless.
Thanks for the reply. IP is involved - draws a blank. HMRC seem impervious to any context/implications and wedded to the fact "we gave you two years to sell and you live in an expensive house whilst you owe us money"
my IVA is set to repay 98% of creditors. But the payments ramp up steeply from now on. The assumption is I sell my house and take cheaper rental accommodation an can pay bigger IVA payments. My plan is somewhat different (ie i leave the country) but they will not listen. I have been to my MP (in Jan) who took up the case willingly, but has achieve nothing. HMRC promise a full answer by 28th March . Meanwhile HMRC send threatening letters to my IP telling them to make sure the house is sold by auction after the 31st Mar.
It seems a bit harsh but I do not know the full facts of the case. Perhaps they may accept a variation whereby the property does not need to be sold provided the debts are repaid in full within five years. This sounds achievable and may be something they would agree to.
It would need a variation but certainly worth a try.
In my experience, once HMRC get a bee in their bonnet about something they will rarely relax their initial requirements. But there is not harm in trying to effect a variation of terms - sometimes HMRC don't even bother to vote!
Fast forward 9 months and my house is now sold and right now I am in temporary accommodation. The net equity from my house was larger than originally expected in the IVA calculations so a variation has been put together to both give me a short payment holiday and bring the end term nearer.
However HMRC have rejected this (not surprisingly) as the variation suggested a lower overall % in the 3 than originally promised. On closer inspection it can be gleaned that this is due to a £20k cost item appearing in the ledger. This cost is associated with an asset recovery specialist who "took control" of the sale of my house.
I was aware of this appointment as the HMRC/IVA supervisor were getting nervous about whether I was really trying to sell my house. However the house was sold to a buyer found by my estate agent (I paid them 1%). As far as I am aware the asset recovery specialist did little more than make a few phone calls to me/the estate agent/the solicitor doing the conveyancing to satisfy himself the sale was proceeding. He talked about taking over the marketing but a sale was already proceeding to several pre existing buyers and despite some delay eventually did complete.For this I get to pay him £20k !!!!!!!
My questions are
1. do I have any right of redress? This £20k is "jobs for the boys" IMHO and a quite outrageous fee.I would be annoyed at a £2k fee but £20k is just quite ridiculous.
2. I find all this out because one of the creditors is kind enough to send me the variation proposal letter (very poorly written I might add). Surely the IVA supervisor has to put me on copy/make me aware of what he is writing to the creditors?
I am sick to death of this process and this country. I wish I had taken bankruptcy 3 years ago and just taken the consequences.
Surely any variation would have had to have been signed and agreed by you in advance?
I am also confused as to what this 'specialist's' role was. If the property was to be sold at auction then why employ anyone other than an auctioneer? The property would have had a restriction against it anyway so you could not sell it without the proceeds being paid to the IVA.
You would be entitled to ask your IP what was going was on as not only has the extra costs meant the variuation has been rejected but you will have to pay them to get the rejection overturned.
I was late selling my house versus the IVA agreement (A deliberate attempt by me to derive more value from a rising market, a strategy that had no truck with HMRC).
HMRC were aggressive in continuing to push for the sale.
The supervisor informed me that he would have to take control of the sale if it did not progress faster. So to that end he appointed (against my wishes) an Asset recovery specialist. The supervisor argued that it was in my interest as this would help him justify to HMRC that we were doing everything possible to sell. He assured me that the Asset recovery specialist would not intervene if a sale was agreed in principle through the estate agent. Luckily for me this was indeed the case. As far as I am aware the asset recovery specialist never had the opportunity or need to take the process any nearer to an auction as a sale completed naturally (after several hiccoughs granted). At no time was I made aware of any work carried out by the Asset recovery specialist other than a few phone calls and emails monitoring progress of a normal sale.
No variation was requested or spoken about due to retaining the Asset recovery specialist. This all only surfaces now when we read the variation letter (sent to bring the IVA to an early close and to agree my payment holiday)....which tells a story of me being in arrears (late sale) but now able to complete the IVA early (more than expected equity) yet the creditors are asked to swallow a couple % lower difference in the payout ?!?!?!?
...Why is not explained in the variation letter but anyone wiht a brain can see its due to a large (hidden in the p&l) and new fee from a asset recovery specialist....
It strikes me that I also should not have to pay for them to rewrite a variation proposal that clearly would never fly in the first place.
I also want to add that the supervisor informed me he had to appoint an asset recovery specialist as he was not familiar with the process himself. So Why did he propose to be my Supervisor in the first place then? with no cost allowance for the additional costs of an asset recovery specialist? In my opinion he should swallow any costs incurred especially when I have no means to validate or challenge them.
It is not uncommon for HMRC to ask for a property to be sold at auction if it has not sold within a certain timeframe. The supervisor then deals with the agent and auctioneer and the sale proceeds as normal.
I do not know what this specialist would bring to the table or why they would be needed but your own supervisor should be able to explain. It seems a lot of money to spend without the approval of creditors and the supervisor will have to provide an explanation of why it was necessary to spend it.
Yes the specialist was brought in because HMRC wanted the house sold. But this does not explain (or justify) how it comes to pass that the specialist gets his £20k and the estate agent also get paid (1%). The creditors had not approved this move, no-one would approve this set up. It's a wast of money, and it will be my money.
I will write a letter fo complaint to my supervisor as I understand this is the first step - what right of redress do I have please when he fobs me off?
Waiting to sell the house to get better equity yield... but not been able to release it without selling....was the flaw logic here.
Decisions made are right at the times it was made but the test is what happens further down the timeline.....
Ips use other agencies to carry out tasks.. like employing firm's for PPIs....those familiar with this know who and 'what I mean'.Bumbling oafs!You know the firm!
Ips seem to then not be in the steering seat and let these contractors or in this case specialist asset recovery to marshall an outcomes.What is the duty of care?
20K charge to 'assist' to sell the house...job for the boys definitely.
There are times we need to seek second opinions from professionals and in an iva there is no such option! Why? That would have helped to avert this bad outcome.3 opinions to settle it and change the Ip if he appears not to be up to the job.That is how it is and got someone else.
When HMRC gets involved in any Iva...debt plaintiff should sound 'general quarters'...wear tinhats.
Last edited by TzeKin on Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fees and costs have to be approved and they come under various categories. Ask the IP which category this cost came under and ask where they had the approval to charge it. You can complain to the regulators or even speak to HMRC yourself and explain your concerns.
ok thanks for this - I think it is going to come down to who is responsible/accountable for the sale costs? The real problem here is we have paid twice and the left hand hasnt known what the right hand is doing. The only person who MUST have been aware of the fact he was going to be paid for a sale that an estate agent was already being paid for is the Asset recovery specialist. TO me he has acted highly unethically anyway if he has charged my supervisor 2% for monitoring someone else's sale, knowing full well the estate agent would be paid for it too.
The IP also knew damn well I was trying to sell through an agent but they suspected i was not trying very hard as they knew i did not want to sell. If they employ someone to supervise the sale for 2% surely they have some responsibility to me/creditors to ensure that costs are minimised.
