Apologies if this has been asked before, put several terms into the search bar and nothing was returned.
I am coming up to my first annual review, the formula used to calculate my monthly payment, takes the household available money after essential bills and then applies my household income contribution.
My wife has her own debt which is outside my IVA - she is in the fortunate position where she could clear that debt, which then would increase "free Income" and then ultimately my IVA contributions my 30-40%. My question is whether if that the debt was to be cleared (which in normal circumstances is the right thing to do)- there was anyway of keeping my contributions the same and the free money as free money for my wife to build a pot of savings, or will the formula always win.
Final question - will Creditors view negatively any increase in monthly credit card payments in relation to my wifes debt.
In most cases what your partner does with their money is their business and, apart from initially using the relative incomes to calculate the proportional shares of allocated expenses, should be of no concern to the IP. Payplan used to be the exception to the rule in that they used to calculate an individual's disposable income based on the household income, rather than the individual's income only. I am not certain that they are the only ones, but are the only one I have come across. Neither do I know if this is still their practice.
Anyway, if you have an IP that recognises that the 'I' in 'IVA' stands for 'Individual' your partners finances should no longer be part of the picture.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
My IV has indicated that they will apply the household income etc rather than the Individual. In your experience is there anything in legislation that requires them to operate in a certain way. I would have thought applying the household rule would not favour the creditors - as you say there is nothing to govern the actions of the partner to reduce what household income is available to calculate the payment(s).
I do not know of anything embedded in the legislation, but the IP has decided to act this way and you agreed to this approach (albeit unwittingly) in putting together the proposal. Who are you with (so that I might add them to my list of firms that deviate from the norm) ? Effectively, the solvent partner is helping to pay the debts of the insolvent partner.
On the whole this does benefit the creditors as it is unlikley they will allow the payments to dip far below the initially agreed and inflated amounts. Worse case scenario is that the IVA is allowed to fail if the payments become untenable due to the solvent partner excercising their rights to financial independence and privacy, at which point the creditors can, again, pursue for full repayment. Of course, and this is just the cynic who resides within my head speaking, higher IVA payments also mean higher fee payments to the IP !
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
People who are mentally disabled are completely exempted and are not required to pay a single penny. If you or any person living in your house is disabled *link deleted - advertising not allowed*, you can apply for a reduction in council tax.
So, it’s quite obvious that no one can give positive feedback about the acceptance of the debt advice by the local council. Also, they might not agree to write all of your debts at all.
