Bankruptcy. Avoiding debt and hiding stuff.
Discussion
JustinP1 said:
My choice now is a stark one, as the reality is I shall have to explain to my wife and daughter the things that we hoped to do but now cannot afford to do because of this. For that reason, I have no desire to throw even more money down a hole, as you have advised, as it just makes matters worse.
Now you're engaging in a little too much self-pity and melodrama methinks. You're talking about £3300 aren't you? Ten per cent of which you chose to spend upon litigation which, if I recall the facts of the case, was ill-advised. You run a business and a TVR, honestly I am struggling to visualise how this magnitude of bad debt is going to ruin your life and if you've been telling your family they were going to do X, Y and Z on the proceeds of a successful court claim you quite frankly shouldn't have been. Small claims is a knock-about business at he best of times, the outcome of which is always uncertain.
You would be far better off accepting the matter as dead, the loss as a £3300 educational course in how not to do things in future and moving on
Eleven said:
JustinP1 said:
My choice now is a stark one, as the reality is I shall have to explain to my wife and daughter the things that we hoped to do but now cannot afford to do because of this. For that reason, I have no desire to throw even more money down a hole, as you have advised, as it just makes matters worse.
Now you're engaging in a little too much self-pity and melodrama methinks. You're talking about £3300 aren't you? Ten per cent of which you chose to spend upon litigation which, if I recall the facts of the case, was ill-advised. You run a business and a TVR, honestly I am struggling to visualise how this magnitude of bad debt is going to ruin your life and if you've been telling your family they were going to do X, Y and Z on the proceeds of a successful court claim you quite frankly shouldn't have been. Small claims is a knock-about business at he best of times, the outcome of which is always uncertain.
You would be far better off accepting the matter as dead, the loss as a £3300 educational course in how not to do things in future and moving on
I run a business, but that doesn't mean I'm loaded, far from it. I don't own a TVR any more, I have a daughter instead now.
The lost of litigation was actually 3% of the claim, and I was a litigant in person so a good risk. The solicitor I spoke to was very good, but that would have dumped £3000 of costs in there, so, I'm glad I didn't. The debt won't ruin my life, no, of course not. But I work hard to provide for my family, and it is somewhat galling to lose a very decent sum of money, even more so to who I lost it to. Where my business is at the moment, £3000 does make a lot of difference to my family. I don't think many on here could simply see £3000 disappear and not see the effect.
With regards to the facts of the case, I think you are thinking of another thread. This one's pretty straightforward, so straightforward that the judge at the set aside hearing did in not many more words explain the reasons to the other side's solicitor that they shouldn't even bother defending it. The Defendant sacked her solicitor when they told her that it was suicidal not to settle.
In terms of 'how not to do things in future', I am somewhat at a loss what I've done wrong... but hey ho...
Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 28th August 11:39
JustinP1 said:
I run a business, I don't own a TVR any more, I have a daughter instead now.
The lost of litigation was actually 3% of the claim, and I was a litigant in person so a good risk. The solicitor I spoke to was very good, but that would have dumped £3000 of costs in there, so, I'm glad I didn't. The debt won't ruin my life, no, of course not. But I work hard to provide for my family, and it is somewhat galling to lose a very decent sum of money, even more so to who I lost it to. Where my business is at the moment, £3000 does make a lot of difference to my family. I don't think many on here could simply see £3000 disappear and not see the effect.
With regards to the facts of the case, I think you are thinking of another thread. This one's pretty straightforward, so straightforward that the judge at the set aside hearing did in not many more words explain the reasons to the other side's solicitor that they shouldn't even bother defending it. The Defendant sacked her solicitor when they told her that it was suicidal not to settle.
In terms of 'how not to do things in future', I am somewhat at a loss what I've done wrong... but hey ho...
£3k is a lump of cash regardless of one's wealth. But unfortunately these things do happen. In my line of work I have people steal from me occasionally but I have become used to making rational rather than emotional decisions about it. It sounds to me like a large part of your concern is "justice denied" rather than the financial loss. The lost of litigation was actually 3% of the claim, and I was a litigant in person so a good risk. The solicitor I spoke to was very good, but that would have dumped £3000 of costs in there, so, I'm glad I didn't. The debt won't ruin my life, no, of course not. But I work hard to provide for my family, and it is somewhat galling to lose a very decent sum of money, even more so to who I lost it to. Where my business is at the moment, £3000 does make a lot of difference to my family. I don't think many on here could simply see £3000 disappear and not see the effect.
With regards to the facts of the case, I think you are thinking of another thread. This one's pretty straightforward, so straightforward that the judge at the set aside hearing did in not many more words explain the reasons to the other side's solicitor that they shouldn't even bother defending it. The Defendant sacked her solicitor when they told her that it was suicidal not to settle.
In terms of 'how not to do things in future', I am somewhat at a loss what I've done wrong... but hey ho...
Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 28th August 10:54
A technique I use sometimes is to consider what any of this would mean to someone reading about it in 100 years time. Would it still be a big story? A flakey landlord took you for a relatively small sum of money and you were unable to get it back. It's not a tale that will be passed down through generations or appear in Wikipedia in 2114. Paraphrased in PH lingo: Dodgy couple behave dodgily shocker.
It is possible that I am confusing you with someone else. But I don't think so. You rented a place off a couple who didn't do appropriate maintenance, you had to heat the place with electric heaters ad incurred a large bill. There was also a communal charge for a cess pit (?) or drain which was charged inappropriately. That you?
FWIW I almost never sue people despite quite a few people doing me financial wrongs, some of whom I am sure I can make a recovery from. There is a stress penalty to pay and rarely is the sum of money great enough to warrant it.
Eleven, I know what you are saying. And also if anyone had seen the claim paperwork had said I didn't have a as near as dammit certain chance at court, I wouldn't have run with it. As it happened, the solicitor who looked over the case physically laughed as he read the Defence, and as I said, the judge himself ripped the Defence apart.
The actual issue is that for a whole winter, we had an absolute nightmare of a time, whilst Lord and Lady Muck drove of in a 10mpg £100k RV around southern europe. I was willing to walk away from the whole issue just as long as we got our tenancy deposit back, and we weren't stuck paying nearly £2000 in electricity arrears that were left when we went - as that would just add insult to injury.
However, not only was that letter filed in the bin, I found that effectively our tenancy deposit was spent fuelling their trips.
Believe me, I am totally with you about not suing for principle, or injustice, I am very practical minded in that respect, which is why I kept costs to a minimum. It was simply to get our money back, and avoid paying a bill that really, we shouldn't have to.
Which is where I am now, asking the good PHers for practical advice on what I can do rapidly, and cheaply to give me the best chance of doing that!
The actual issue is that for a whole winter, we had an absolute nightmare of a time, whilst Lord and Lady Muck drove of in a 10mpg £100k RV around southern europe. I was willing to walk away from the whole issue just as long as we got our tenancy deposit back, and we weren't stuck paying nearly £2000 in electricity arrears that were left when we went - as that would just add insult to injury.
However, not only was that letter filed in the bin, I found that effectively our tenancy deposit was spent fuelling their trips.
Believe me, I am totally with you about not suing for principle, or injustice, I am very practical minded in that respect, which is why I kept costs to a minimum. It was simply to get our money back, and avoid paying a bill that really, we shouldn't have to.
Which is where I am now, asking the good PHers for practical advice on what I can do rapidly, and cheaply to give me the best chance of doing that!
Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 28th August 12:02
JustinP1 said:
Eleven, I know what you are saying.
The actual issue is that for a whole winter, we had an absolute nightmare of a time, whilst Lord and Lady Muck drove of in a 10mpg £100k RV around southern europe. I was willing to walk away from the whole issue just as long as we got our tenancy deposit back, and we weren't stuck paying nearly £2000 in electricity arrears that were left when we went - as that would just add insult to injury.
However, not only was that letter filed in the bin, I found that effectively our tenancy deposit was spent fuelling their trips.
Believe me, I am totally with you about not suing for principle, or injustice, I am very practical minded in that respect, which is why I kept costs to a minimum. It was simply to get our money back, and avoid paying a bill that really, we shouldn't have to.
Which is where I am now, asking the good PHers for practical advice on what I can do rapidly, and cheaply to give me the best chance of doing that!
I think I read on PH from a legal type person that they like pursuing cases for clients who want to defend a principle, as it's generally an easy way to a lot of fees.The actual issue is that for a whole winter, we had an absolute nightmare of a time, whilst Lord and Lady Muck drove of in a 10mpg £100k RV around southern europe. I was willing to walk away from the whole issue just as long as we got our tenancy deposit back, and we weren't stuck paying nearly £2000 in electricity arrears that were left when we went - as that would just add insult to injury.
However, not only was that letter filed in the bin, I found that effectively our tenancy deposit was spent fuelling their trips.
Believe me, I am totally with you about not suing for principle, or injustice, I am very practical minded in that respect, which is why I kept costs to a minimum. It was simply to get our money back, and avoid paying a bill that really, we shouldn't have to.
Which is where I am now, asking the good PHers for practical advice on what I can do rapidly, and cheaply to give me the best chance of doing that!
I know you mention that you just want the money back, but given the back story and the current situation, it looks most likely you will spend effort, emotion and a lot of cash to try to do this, with very little chance of actually getting the original debt back.
It sounds to me that these people know the "game" and you are totally wasting your time and money chasing it any further through "legal" means!
If you think that Lady X ha £3k there is different ways of getting your money back minus 20-30% but only if you are the type of person that is like her!
My advice is move on with your life and try to forget about it.
If you think that Lady X ha £3k there is different ways of getting your money back minus 20-30% but only if you are the type of person that is like her!
My advice is move on with your life and try to forget about it.
Grandfondo said:
It sounds to me that these people know the "game" and you are totally wasting your time and money chasing it any further through "legal" means!
If you think that Lady X ha £3k there is different ways of getting your money back minus 20-30% but only if you are the type of person that is like her!
My advice is move on with your life and try to forget about it.
I couldn't agree more. Either put it completely behind you and put it down to experience or get redress some other way, in the full knowledge of the risks entailed. If the latter, start by telling everyone you've done the former and stop posting on the internet.If you think that Lady X ha £3k there is different ways of getting your money back minus 20-30% but only if you are the type of person that is like her!
My advice is move on with your life and try to forget about it.
Losing £3k is irritating, a bit like depreciation on a car. You do seem to be "emotionally" invested in this loss. Is it really worth it?
Even if you do get judgement in your favour, where would you be in the list of creditors and what would the payout be? 20p in pound? On £3K that would be £600.
Line drawing time I think.
Even if you do get judgement in your favour, where would you be in the list of creditors and what would the payout be? 20p in pound? On £3K that would be £600.
Line drawing time I think.
Whoa whoa whoa Sweet Child 'o Mine!
I didn't just start this thread to bleat or moan - check the OP. I only mentioned facts of the claim as a poster suggested that the claim itself was ill-founded.
I don't want to just 'forget it' for good reason - I've started the thread to get specific advice about bankruptcy. In particular:
a) How I go about 'proving' the debt to the Official Receiver, and
b) If there is anything I can do (that I've not already done) to make sure assets haven't been hidden and the bankruptcy is kosher.
There's no point in me just 'forgetting about it', if I can do the above with very little cost and a modest investment of time. Indeed, I'd be pretty stupid to give up at this stage and do nothing, if all I need to do is get my name on a debtors list, and then have the chance to get a cheque in 12 months time. Especially when the alternative is my claim gets wiped out anyway, and if there is a remaining sum it will go to the debtor!
There are significant assets involved, which will outweigh the unsecured debts the vast majority of people would be allowed to run up.
I didn't just start this thread to bleat or moan - check the OP. I only mentioned facts of the claim as a poster suggested that the claim itself was ill-founded.
I don't want to just 'forget it' for good reason - I've started the thread to get specific advice about bankruptcy. In particular:
a) How I go about 'proving' the debt to the Official Receiver, and
b) If there is anything I can do (that I've not already done) to make sure assets haven't been hidden and the bankruptcy is kosher.
There's no point in me just 'forgetting about it', if I can do the above with very little cost and a modest investment of time. Indeed, I'd be pretty stupid to give up at this stage and do nothing, if all I need to do is get my name on a debtors list, and then have the chance to get a cheque in 12 months time. Especially when the alternative is my claim gets wiped out anyway, and if there is a remaining sum it will go to the debtor!
There are significant assets involved, which will outweigh the unsecured debts the vast majority of people would be allowed to run up.
Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 28th August 13:17
I don’t wish (nor am I qualified) to give advice but, as a question, is one of the possible outcomes here that "Lady X," has committed a criminal offence by failing to disclose the OP as a creditor in her Bankruptcy Statement of Affairs?
As such, would it be worth the OP asking "Lady X," herself to disclose:
1 Copies of all relevant court filings, notices sent to creditors, etc (if applicable, as yet)
2 Details of the Office of the Official Receiver that is administering her bankruptcy (already obtained…) and any applicable Trustee in Bankruptcy and
3 The steps taken by "Lady X," to inform the OR or Trustee of the OP's existence as a creditor, to the current time
I reiterate that I am not a Lawyer…but is it not, potentially, more important (and potentially damaging to her) that "Lady X," has filed for bankruptcy without the disclosure of the OP as a creditor than had she filed for bankruptcy and disclosed the OP as a creditor (in which case he would be in the, small, pool)?
As such, would it be worth the OP asking "Lady X," herself to disclose:
1 Copies of all relevant court filings, notices sent to creditors, etc (if applicable, as yet)
2 Details of the Office of the Official Receiver that is administering her bankruptcy (already obtained…) and any applicable Trustee in Bankruptcy and
3 The steps taken by "Lady X," to inform the OR or Trustee of the OP's existence as a creditor, to the current time
I reiterate that I am not a Lawyer…but is it not, potentially, more important (and potentially damaging to her) that "Lady X," has filed for bankruptcy without the disclosure of the OP as a creditor than had she filed for bankruptcy and disclosed the OP as a creditor (in which case he would be in the, small, pool)?
IanA2 said:
Losing £3k is irritating, a bit like depreciation on a car. You do seem to be "emotionally" invested in this loss. Is it really worth it?
Even if you do get judgement in your favour, where would you be in the list of creditors and what would the payout be? 20p in pound? On £3K that would be £600.
Line drawing time I think.
As I said, a few times, I have my 'legal' head on here. In litigation you play the odds not the principle. I know that.Even if you do get judgement in your favour, where would you be in the list of creditors and what would the payout be? 20p in pound? On £3K that would be £600.
Line drawing time I think.
Sums, including interest will be circa £12k. Even if it went to court, and was disputed, the very worst case scenario is £9k. Even 20p in the point on that is fine, especially if I can get that with a few hours effort now.
I know there are three unsecured creditors, apart from me. I also know that the debtor had at least £50k of assets a few weeks ago, on top of the £70k plus which disappeared just under a year ago. In terms of the assets, if they haven't been sold, I happen to know where they are, in storage. So, a few things go in my favour.
I've had a few instances of people owing me money going bankrupt and my experience is that as HMRC get their hands on any cash/assets first there usually isn't any left for anyone else.
£3k is a fair amount of money to lose and very disheartening but I'd not throw more money at it with chances of recovery so low.
£3k is a fair amount of money to lose and very disheartening but I'd not throw more money at it with chances of recovery so low.
I'll support you on this Justin! There is nothing more irritating than when debtors play the system!
I have some sympathy for those that go genuinely bankrupt due to circumstances beyond their control, and the system helps them get back on their feet!
BUT those that use the system for their own personal gain, or to 'spite' those that are owed money, especially those that see it as a game, then provided it does not lead to substantial additional money being thrown after bad, I say go for it!
Regardless of achieving a reasonable recovery, these perps need to be brought to book, otherwise others that deal with them will likely suffer loss at their hands in the future, and it might just be catastrophic for them. If we all took the stance, 'well let's just go for the easy life and forget', then perps such as these will thrive!
I have some sympathy for those that go genuinely bankrupt due to circumstances beyond their control, and the system helps them get back on their feet!
BUT those that use the system for their own personal gain, or to 'spite' those that are owed money, especially those that see it as a game, then provided it does not lead to substantial additional money being thrown after bad, I say go for it!
Regardless of achieving a reasonable recovery, these perps need to be brought to book, otherwise others that deal with them will likely suffer loss at their hands in the future, and it might just be catastrophic for them. If we all took the stance, 'well let's just go for the easy life and forget', then perps such as these will thrive!
If you know where the undeclared assets are stored go and see lady X - tell her you have dated photographic evidence of its location. Then give her 12 hours to credit your account/pay you cash or you will report to the OR their whereabouts. Once you've got the cash report her anyway!
elanfan said:
If you know where the undeclared assets are stored go and see lady X - tell her you have dated photographic evidence of its location. Then give her 12 hours to credit your account/pay you cash or you will report to the OR their whereabouts. Once you've got the cash report her anyway!
Blackmail would see him go to prison. I don't think your suggestion is the best in the world. Or even the second best.Steffan said:
I spent many years working on the Insolvency of others. I am a retired Chartered Accountant. I have seen all the tricks described on here and regrettably Bankruptcy can be manipulated by devious dishonest individuals. The majority of the replies thus far are pretty well on the button.
For the avoidance of doubt were I in your position I would consider carefully whether I wished to engage in seeking to collect a debt which is very likely to involve expenditure but very unlikely to produce much in return. The OR is overworked and understaffed. Whilst the OR will listen to all creditors including you unless you can prove beyond all doubt that fraud is occurring and the entire bankruptcy is a sham you have very little chance of actually achieving anything from this. I wish that were not the case but sadly I fear it is.
Some Bankrupts can and do evade and avoid debts very effectively. The burden of proof will be on you if you wish to take action. The OR is simply not staffed or funded to carry out serious enquiries. Bankruptcy in recent years has become a system that is designed to enable debts to be written off if the Bankrupt declares the debts and seeks the protection of the Courts. That phrase is critical in its structure. Bankruptcy is designed to allow individuals to begin again without the huge debts. This may seem unfair but it is actually how the legislation works.
As others have suggested if the Bankrupt fails to include debts even when these are substantial the chances are that the OR will add them to the declared debt unless massive sums and deliberate planed misrepresentation has been hidden deliberately by the bankrupt. If there are any specific questions I will try to be helpful in replies. But I honestly doubt that this is actually worth the candle.
^^^^^agree, I was once unfortunately in the same position that you Justinp1 find yourself in, and regrettably I can agree with all of the above. I found the Insolvency Services had little resources to delve too much into a bankrupt's case, instead being all too quick to protect the interests of the bankrupt, by both protecting the bankrupt and rubber stamping the bankruptcy application.For the avoidance of doubt were I in your position I would consider carefully whether I wished to engage in seeking to collect a debt which is very likely to involve expenditure but very unlikely to produce much in return. The OR is overworked and understaffed. Whilst the OR will listen to all creditors including you unless you can prove beyond all doubt that fraud is occurring and the entire bankruptcy is a sham you have very little chance of actually achieving anything from this. I wish that were not the case but sadly I fear it is.
Some Bankrupts can and do evade and avoid debts very effectively. The burden of proof will be on you if you wish to take action. The OR is simply not staffed or funded to carry out serious enquiries. Bankruptcy in recent years has become a system that is designed to enable debts to be written off if the Bankrupt declares the debts and seeks the protection of the Courts. That phrase is critical in its structure. Bankruptcy is designed to allow individuals to begin again without the huge debts. This may seem unfair but it is actually how the legislation works.
As others have suggested if the Bankrupt fails to include debts even when these are substantial the chances are that the OR will add them to the declared debt unless massive sums and deliberate planed misrepresentation has been hidden deliberately by the bankrupt. If there are any specific questions I will try to be helpful in replies. But I honestly doubt that this is actually worth the candle.
Edited by Steffan on Wednesday 27th August 22:58
elanfan said:
If you know where the undeclared assets are stored go and see lady X - tell her you have dated photographic evidence of its location. Then give her 12 hours to credit your account/pay you cash or you will report to the OR their whereabouts. Once you've got the cash report her anyway!
If I was the OP and I knew the whereabouts of undeclared assets I'd be considering helping myself to them to the tune of the outstanding debt.EJH said:
I don’t wish (nor am I qualified) to give advice but, as a question, is one of the possible outcomes here that "Lady X," has committed a criminal offence by failing to disclose the OP as a creditor in her Bankruptcy Statement of Affairs?
As such, would it be worth the OP asking "Lady X," herself to disclose:
1 Copies of all relevant court filings, notices sent to creditors, etc (if applicable, as yet)
2 Details of the Office of the Official Receiver that is administering her bankruptcy (already obtained…) and any applicable Trustee in Bankruptcy and
3 The steps taken by "Lady X," to inform the OR or Trustee of the OP's existence as a creditor, to the current time
I reiterate that I am not a Lawyer…but is it not, potentially, more important (and potentially damaging to her) that "Lady X," has filed for bankruptcy without the disclosure of the OP as a creditor than had she filed for bankruptcy and disclosed the OP as a creditor (in which case he would be in the, small, pool)?
Lady X will have had her attention drawn to the Perjury Act by the Official Receiver at the start of her interview. If she wanted to disclose any assets disposed of within the last 5 years or add any creditors not previously mentioned, that was her opportunity. If assets or creditors now come to light, it will be for her to explain how she "forgot" to include them.As such, would it be worth the OP asking "Lady X," herself to disclose:
1 Copies of all relevant court filings, notices sent to creditors, etc (if applicable, as yet)
2 Details of the Office of the Official Receiver that is administering her bankruptcy (already obtained…) and any applicable Trustee in Bankruptcy and
3 The steps taken by "Lady X," to inform the OR or Trustee of the OP's existence as a creditor, to the current time
I reiterate that I am not a Lawyer…but is it not, potentially, more important (and potentially damaging to her) that "Lady X," has filed for bankruptcy without the disclosure of the OP as a creditor than had she filed for bankruptcy and disclosed the OP as a creditor (in which case he would be in the, small, pool)?
In the case of the OP, it would be tempting to make the Official Receiver aware of the assets [nature, location, value, circumstances of removal] and then make sure it is followed up. They may have limited resources themselves but do have responsibilities to creditors - at the very least they could offer it to an IP on their rota and let the IP take a gamble on there being assets to be paid from. It may not achieve a high net return to creditors but it is probably the easiest way to make sure missing assets are pursued and Lady X inconvenienced. If she has mis-behaved the bankruptcy duration can be extended to up to 15 years.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff