# Bankruptcy term reduced to 1 year - IPO for 3 years?



## Stuboy

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irelan...pproved-to-be-approved-by-cabinet-367280.html


----------



## Silvio Dante

Thanks to you both for this most welcome news.

Anyone any idea in practical terms what's the timescale?


----------



## MikeL2007

Great news folks.

Does anyone know if the Payment order reduction to 3 years is going in too?

Mike


----------



## Stuboy

Has anyone seen Penrose's actual proposed legislation? We all made submissions to the committee regarding what we would like a 1 year bankruptcy to look like, but I haven't actually seen the details of his proposal. 
Also as Silvio states above; beyond next week, assuming it's passed in the Dail, how quickly will the changes come into force? I am sure that anyone with an adjudication anniversary approaching in Jan/Feb would like it to be pretty immediate, but how likely is that?
For those that are over a year in Bankruptcy, how quickly can they be discharged once it's law?


----------



## Silvio Dante

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/bills28/bills/2015/2415/b2415d.pdf

Stu,

Here's the bill.
You will be discharged 3 months after it becomes law if you've already completed a year.

Mike,

Bill also includes the 3 year clause

Guys,

On re-read of Examiner it says "Mr Kenny said priority would be given to its passage through the Oireachtas and his intention would be that it can happen in the current Dáil session"

Session is pre Christmas as opposed to term.
So very good news


----------



## TLO

This is the simplest and most straightforward piece of proposed legislation regarding personal insolvency that we have seen yet.  Hats off to the drafter.  Let's hope it goes through, the clarity that it will bring will be good for insolvent individuals, their creditors, and society at large.

I did notice the bit at the end; 

"Short title
2. This Act may be cited as the Personal Insolvency (Amendment) Act 2015."

As we already have a "Personal Insolvency (Amendment) Act 2015" presumably the Oireachtas will need to call it something else.  A minor point in the overall scheme of things.


----------



## Stuboy

Silvio Dante said:


> http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/bills28/bills/2015/2415/b2415d.pdf
> 
> Stu,
> 
> Here's the bill.
> You will be discharged 3 months after it becomes law if you've already completed a year.
> 
> Mike,
> 
> Bill also includes the 3 year clause
> 
> Guys,
> 
> On re-read of Examiner it says "Mr Kenny said priority would be given to its passage through the Oireachtas and his intention would be that it can happen in the current Dáil session"
> 
> Session is pre Christmas as opposed to term.
> So very good news


Thanks for that, it's nice a simple.


----------



## MikeL2007

Great news indeed Brendan, for a long time I didn't want to get my hopes up too much but now it does seem as if there is light at the end of the tunnel.


----------



## Catastrophe

MikeL2007 said:


> Great news indeed Brendan, for a long time I didn't want to get my hopes up too much but now it does seem as if there is light a
> t the end of the tunnel.


The Bill is being presented to Cabinet this Tuesday according to David Hall's Facebook account.


----------



## Stuboy

Sounds like last minute alterations are being made to the bill
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/bankruptcy-term-to-be-cut-to-one-year-1.2448018


----------



## Silvio Dante

There was always going to be a few tweaks but doubt Penrose having come so far will swallow any watering down process.
Any form of discretionary powers or heaven forbid vetoes would be a fear.
It's moving at a pace at least.


----------



## Stuboy

My worry would be a monitoring of your income level post discharge for a few years even if there is no IPO imposed at time of discharge


----------



## Silvio Dante

I'd be confident anything that leaves door ajar for UK route to be more preferable will not be included.
It defeats the main purpose of the bill.


----------



## Catastrophe

Mad Ted. Anyone already in bankruptcy has to wait 18 months to be discharged.  Enter bankruptcy in January 2016 and you're out in 12 months!


----------



## Sarenco

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/1130/750330-fitzgerald-bankruptcy-bill/

Bill to be brought to cabinet tomorrow per RTE.


----------



## Stuboy

From today's irish times...
"In the bill, the discharge term for bankruptcy is reduced from three years to one year. Individuals who have been bankrupt for more than one year prior to the legislation’s enactment would be discharged after three months, although it is understood a Government amendment will increase this period to six months."

It also states that it will be law by year end.
Question. Does the 6 months apply to only those that are beyond one year as implied above? Or to anyone who is already in the process as seemed to be implied in the article yesterday. I guess we'll find out later.
Anyway. To everyone that made a submission well done. I had hoped but was afraid to believe it.


----------



## Delboy

According to Morning Ireland, those already in the Bankruptcy process are on an 18 month timescale as opposed to new Entrants after this Bill is passed who will be on 12 months


----------



## Silvio Dante

The 6 month discharge period is a kick in the nuts but at least it's going through.
Unfortunately I don't believe it's a case of serving 18 months if you are in process, it's a case of if you have completed at least 1 year you must do a further 6 months.
I strongly suspect ISI pushed for this to give them more time to deal with things.

Here's one man who will be bucking the national trend and giving Labour a vote!


----------



## Stuboy

http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2015/1201/750398-new-bankruptcy-bill/


----------



## Silvio Dante

I'm confused.
I think it's clear anyone currently bankrupt has to serve 18 months.
However, if someone has completed 18 months how long before they are discharged?
Immediate, 3 months or 6 months?


----------



## Matthew Moore

Silvio Dante said:


> I'm confused.
> I think it's clear anyone currently bankrupt has to serve 18 months.
> However, if someone has completed 18 months how long before they are discharged?
> Immediate, 3 months or 6 months?



It'll be interesting to get a look at the bill. Can't understand the reasoning behind the 18 months discharge for current bankrupts, it's paticularity nasty for anybody who was adjudicated bankrupt yesterday. Hope the media reports are wrong. There's some other areas I'm not entirely happy with if the reports are true [broken link removed]


----------



## HelpingHand

pat2 said:


> It'll be interesting to get a look at the bill. Can't understand the reasoning behind the 18 months discharge for current bankrupts, it's paticularity nasty for anybody who was adjudicated bankrupt yesterday. Hope the media reports are wrong. There's some other areas I'm not entirely happy with if the reports are true [broken link removed]



Or tomorrow, this law will only have effect, when the current bill passes through the two houses of the Oirechtas and is passed into law by the appropriate minister. ( hopefully some time before Christmas .)


----------



## Silvio Dante

pat2 said:


> It'll be interesting to get a look at the bill. Can't understand the reasoning behind the 18 months discharge for current bankrupts, it's paticularity nasty for anybody who was adjudicated bankrupt yesterday. Hope the media reports are wrong. There's some other areas I'm not entirely happy with if the reports are true [broken link removed]



Pat,

Very disappointing this hasn't been qualified.
I've completed 18 months but now don't know if I will be discharged immediately it becomes law, 3 months after this (Penrose original bill) or 6 months after it.

I am assuming the 18 months was on request from ISI so they don't have a slew of discharges to handle all at once and can stagger the process.


----------



## Silvio Dante

Silvio Dante said:


> Pat,
> 
> Very disappointing this hasn't been qualified.
> I've completed 18 months but now don't know if I will be discharged immediately it becomes law, 3 months after this (Penrose original bill) or 6 months after it.
> 
> I am assuming the 18 months was on request from ISI so they don't have a slew of discharges to handle all at once and can stagger the process.



The picture is very confusing

IT says AG has been asked to provide that there be a six-month period of transition for people already in the bankruptcy process. This should mean that people already in the system will be facing an 18-month term

Examiner says It is now unclear as to what will happen to those who are already bankrupt should the bill be passed however, it is understood that those who have been so for one year could be cleared after three months. 

At least all reports pointing to it being enacted pre Xmas.

The 6 month transition is just daft and will create an administrative nightmare
Assuming say it's law on Dec 20th 
Every single person adjudicated bankrupt between May 20th 2013 and Dec 2014 will have to be discharged on same date.
Daft


----------



## Stuboy

[QUOTE=" Every single person adjudicated bankrupt between May 20th 2013 and Dec 2014 will have to be discharged on same date. Daft[/QUOTE]
But we're very good at 'Daft' in Ireland at times. Hopefully, once clarified, this won't be another example of it.


----------



## Silvio Dante

I have a real fear of the following creeping into the imminent legislation.
18 months for existing bankrupts and a further 6 months transition.
Reports are quoting both but my fear is they are not mutually exclusive and existing bankrupts may in fact be facing 24 months which would be shockingly unfair.

Can everyone affected contact a rep asap to seek clarification?


----------



## Catastrophe

Silvio Dante said:


> I have a real fear of the following creeping into the imminent legislation.
> 18 months for existing bankrupts and a further 6 months transition.
> Reports are quoting both but my fear is they are not mutually exclusive and existing bankrupts may in fact be facing 24 months which would be shockingly unfair.
> 
> Can everyone affected contact a rep asap to seek clarification?


 I haven't seen anything in the media however I'm sure I heard Ivan Yates state that Willie Penrose's bill was enacted yesterday.


----------



## Silvio Dante

Catastrophe said:


> I haven't seen anything in the media however I'm sure I heard Ivan Yates state that Willie Penrose's bill was enacted yesterday.



The Cabinet approved the bill on Wed to ensure it becomes law by Christmas.
It will be heard in the Dail next Tuesday.

There is still uncertainty regarding existing bankrupts.
It appears unfortunately as if there is definitely a "transitional period" included of 6 months and not the 3 months in Penrose bill.
However a 18 mths period to qualify has been mooted in many reports.

If the 18 months is mandatory and then subject to another 6 months transition then existing bankrupts would serve a minimum of 24 months, very unfair.
In the most bizarre scenario, someone who has served 2 years and 11 months would now serve 3 years and 5 months. Crazy

Can anyone find a copy of the new bill?
I've emailed two TDs this morning asking for a copy, it will be circulated to all Oireachtas members.

The 1 year bankruptcy is now a done deal but a minor change can still be made if it is raised in Dail or Seanad next week during reading.

I've also heard nothing on the payment orders but it would be dangerous to assume it might not have been tinkered with also.

If anyone gets a copy, please post.

Thanks


----------



## Silvio Dante

btw
This was the same Yates who told Willie Penrose on air 3 weeks ago no way would the bill see light during current Dail.


----------



## Silvio Dante

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=30407&&CatID=59

Looks like 6 months transition full stop.
No mention of 18 months anywhere I can see
And no tinkering with the 3 year payment order time frame.

All comments appreciated


----------



## Matthew Moore

Seems straightforward enough. It's an awful pity that it's a 6 month transition but thankfully it's not stuck on the end on the 12 month term.

My understanding of it is this *(assuming it's commenced on the 01/01/2016 for example)*:

1.Any bankrupt due (under the old system) to be discharged, in the 6 months after the bill becomes operative, will be discharged on the same date. This Bill will have no effect on them.

2.Any bankrupt declared bankrupt after the 01/07/2015 will be discharged on the first anniversary.

3.Any bankrupt declared bankrupt after 01/07/2013 up till 30/06/2015 will be discharged on the 01/07/2015.

In my own case, I was adjudicated a bankrupt on the 20/04/2015. Therefore, I will have to wait 6 months from the Bill commencement to be discharged; ie 01/07/2016

Please let me know if I've went wrong anywhere


----------



## Ciara Lee

I was adjudicated bankrupt in April 2014 and according to my advisor - anybody who has served min 18 months when the Bill is passed, will be automatically discharged.  I am hoping he is right but I am still doubtful (He has been wrong in the past)


----------



## Silvio Dante

Ciara Lee said:


> I was adjudicated bankrupt in April 2014 and according to my advisor - anybody who has served min 18 months when the Bill is passed, will be automatically discharged.  I am hoping he is right but I am still doubtful (He has been wrong in the past)



Hi Ciara,

Alas, I fear he is not right and you will not be discharged until 6 months from date of passing of legislation.
There seems to be 100% agreement that will happen this week so you should be discharged mid June 2016.

The 6 month period in the legislation is referred to as a transitional period which would give some hope that the period will be used to discharge those over 12 or possibly 18 months in an orderly fashion during the 6 months but I wouldn't bank on it.
Converging 2 years of bankrupts (approx 1000) on one set date 6 months from now looks like a big ask.

Have the ISI given assurances they can handle this?


----------



## TLO

According to Radio Nova's 4.00pm news bulletin the Dail has passed the legislation and it has gone to the Seanad.


----------



## Ciara Lee

Thanks Silvio - looks like you are right.  Found the following - taken from Francis Fitzgeralds Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill 2015: Second Stage:

Any bankruptcy already existing when the Bill comes into effect will also benefit from the changes introduced by this Bill subject to a six-month transitional period. This reflects the six month transition period provided previously when the bankruptcy term was reduced from 12 years to three years by the Personal Insolvency Act 2012. It is needed to ensure sufficient time is available to ensure a smooth transition and to make any necessary applications to court for extension of time in cases which raise possible issues of non-cooperation or attempted concealment.

Under the transitional provisions, and assuming that there are no grounds for extension, an existing bankruptcy, which was due to terminate three years after adjudication, if it is already due to terminate less than six months after the commencement date will terminate on its due date, otherwise it will now terminate one year after adjudication or six months after commencement if that is the later date; an existing bankruptcy payment order which was due to expire five years after it was made by the court, if it is already due to expire less than six months after the commencement date will terminate on its due date, otherwise it will now expire three years after it was made or six months after commencement if that is a later date.


----------



## Silvio Dante

A very big hand to Senator Averil Power who was kind enough during today's debate on the bill in the Seanad on request from Stuboy and me to seek clarification of the "transitional period" and to raise concerns if "1000 bankrupts" had to be discharged on a single date.
Aodhan O' Riordain who was in the Seanad on behalf of the bill in reply seemed to indicate the process would be a staggered one but I'd have to see the transcript later to be sure.
If so, the period for those who have completed 18 months is a max of 6 more months and not an automatic 6 more months.


----------



## Silvio Dante

*Bankruptcy (Amendment) Bill 2015: Committee and Remaining Stages*

 Sections 1 to 3, inclusive, agreed to.

 Question proposed: "That section 4 stand part of the Bill."

*Senator Averil Power:*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=1&HouseNum=24&MemberID=2351http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...351&pid=AverilPower&year=2015&month=12&day=17 I noted the Minister of State's response on the transitional periods but I am no more enlightened than was the case when I asked the question. He stated he is satisfied that the transitional period will work smoothly. The specific question I asked relates to the approximately 1,000 people who have already been in bankruptcy from more than 12 months. As I understand it, they will become eligible to be discharged six months after the Bill comes into force. Will they all become eligible on that date and will the Insolvency Service of Ireland then be obliged to work through each of the individual cases and be satisfied that the bankruptcy is appropriate and that they should not be extended to a longer time limit or will it start working immediately after the Bill is passed and use that six-month period to deal with people, in chronological order perhaps, starting with those who have been in the process the longest and start letting people go on a week by week basis rather than ensuring that all cases fall due on the same date?

*Minister of State at the Department of Justice and Equality (Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin):*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=0&HouseNum=31&MemberID=2301http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...&pid=AodhanORiordan&year=2015&month=12&day=17 Not everybody will be eligible on the same day. They will be dealt with on a staggered basis.

*Senator Averil Power:*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=1&HouseNum=24&MemberID=2351http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...351&pid=AverilPower&year=2015&month=12&day=17 They will have to wait for six months. Will the six months be used to release people now from bankruptcy or will they all have to wait six months before the process starts?

*Senator Aideen Hayden:*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=1&HouseNum=24&MemberID=2384http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...84&pid=AideenHayden&year=2015&month=12&day=17 I have a question on the same point. It is my understanding, and perhaps the Minister will put me right on this, that the purpose of the six months was to allow the official assignee to determine whether there was, in fact, any reason the bankruptcy term should be extended, in other words whether there was any hiding of assets or fraud. My understanding of the six-month period is that it will simply be to allow the assignee to determine whether the bankrupt should be discharged.

*Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin:*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=0&HouseNum=31&MemberID=2301http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...&pid=AodhanORiordan&year=2015&month=12&day=17 I reiterate the point that under the transitional provisions, assuming there are no grounds for extension an existing bankruptcy which was due to terminate three years after adjudication, if it is already due to terminate less than six months after the commencement date, will terminate on its due date. Otherwise, it will terminate one year after adjudication or six months after commencement if that is the later date.

*Senator Averil Power:*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=1&HouseNum=24&MemberID=2351http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...351&pid=AverilPower&year=2015&month=12&day=17 Will the Minister of State to confirm, as Senator Hayden outlined, that the six months will be used to go through the files so the body of work has been done during the transitional period? Will the six months being used for this purpose, so that in six months time some people will be let go on day one, day two and day three? With respect, it has taken a lot of tick-tacking between the Minister of State and the officials for him to understand the position.

*Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin:*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=0&HouseNum=31&MemberID=2301http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...&pid=AodhanORiordan&year=2015&month=12&day=17 No problem.

*Senator Averil Power:*http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-hist/default.asp?housetype=1&HouseNum=24&MemberID=2351http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...351&pid=AverilPower&year=2015&month=12&day=17 I am just seeking clarity.

 Question put and agreed to.


----------



## Silvio Dante

The above would give hope that the transitional period will be used to funnel people out in an orderly fashion (presumably chronological).
Deputy O'Riordain confirmed the releases would be done on a staggered basis rather than converging them on a  single date.
Surely sensible.


----------



## Stuboy

The president signed the bill on the 25th. Is that the date it became law?


----------



## Silvio Dante

Stu,

Frances Fitzgerald has to sign a commencement order and that is the relevant date.
No earthly reason why she should sit on it at this stage but I'd assume she wont sign till early in new year.


----------



## KrakityJones

Hi again

Would you know if the IPO of 3 years kicks in after the 1 year of bankruptcy or is it from the start? Eg if I went bankrupt on 1st Jan 2016 and had an IPO would I be paying this back for 3 years total or 4 years total?


----------



## Stuboy

KrakityJones said:


> Hi again
> 
> Would you know if the IPO of 3 years kicks in after the 1 year of bankruptcy or is it from the start? Eg if I went bankrupt on 1st Jan 2016 and had an IPO would I be paying this back for 3 years total or 4 years total?


3 years total


----------



## MikeL2007

Hi folks,

Has anyone heard any update on when the Minister will actually the sign the commencement order given the President signed it in December?

Mike


----------



## Silvio Dante

I asked Averil Power to raise it with Justice and they replied last week to say "no set date as yet but working on it and should commence within weeks"

Stuboy was kind enough to refer me to Averil some months back and I have to say she has been extraordinarily helpful.


----------



## MikeL2007

Thanks Silvio.  Only delay I can think of is that the ISI/Courts aren't ready for it, all the minister has to do is sign it


----------



## Silvio Dante

MikeL2007 said:


> Thanks Silvio.  Only delay I can think of is that the ISI/Courts aren't ready for it, all the minister has to do is sign it



I don't think that's it, think it's procedural, never commences immediate on signing, will always be a few procedural issues.
Probably not helped by Dail being off for 3 weeks post signing but that's life.

Again Averil Power took up issue with Justice of potential logjam with 2.5 years of bankrupts being discharged on a single date (6 months post commencement date).
She was assured this isn't an issue and the discharge is "automatic" unless the ISI intend to apply for an extension.

I'd be a little dubious at the seamlessness of this but we have no choice now but to wait and see.


----------



## MikeL2007

Thanks Silvio.

Does that not contradict Senator Powers query and associated response from the Seanad debate before Christmas where the FG deputy for Justice said that the release of bankrupts would be staggered?


----------



## Silvio Dante

It was Aodhan O' Riordan and yes it would appear it does.
If you look at the footage you will see he is a bit unsure himself and I think he just winged the answer as the debate was coming to a close when Senator Power intervened.

However, the legislation and what the Minister said in the Seanad should still allow for ISI to discharge on a staggered basis, if for no better reason that it is the most sensible, fair and orderly way to do it.

My intention would be that I will write to the ISI on commencement and ask that I be released as all my affairs have been long taken care of and see what they say.
It is surely in the ISI interest to get people out who have served more than a year already and whose affairs have been dealt with and not allow a logjam develop with approx 1,000 bankrupts due for discharge on a set date 6 months from now.


----------



## MikeL2007

Exactly the same plan here Silvio.


----------



## breakonthru

KrakityJones said:


> bankrupt on 1st Jan 2016 and had an IPO



Hi folks,

Just in relation to the above, if i went bankrupt and the OA found that my income was under the Reasonable Living Guideline amounts - at what date after bankruptcy would the OA come back and check if i'm earning more than the RLE's? 

Every month for 1 year, 
every month for three years,
etc?
I.e at what point will the OA stop bothering me in relation to "do i have any more cash for my creditors"?

Cheers


----------



## Stuboy

breakonthru said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> Just in relation to the above, if i went bankrupt and the OA found that my income was under the Reasonable Living Guideline amounts - at what date after bankruptcy would the OA come back and check if i'm earning more than the RLE's?
> 
> Every month for 1 year,
> every month for three years,
> etc?
> I.e at what point will the OA stop bothering me in relation to "do i have any more cash for my creditors"?
> 
> Cheers


Do you mean during your bankruptcy?
if so then you are obliged to inform the OA if your income changes and may put you over the RLE level.
If you get an increase in your income which puts you over the RLE and do not inform the OA then you could be considered to be concealing assets/income.

Once you are discharged (presuming you are not over the RLE at that point) the OA has no more interest in you; you are no longer bankrupt.


----------



## breakonthru

Stuboy said:


> Do you mean during your bankruptcy?



..yes, exactly during the 1 year bankruptcy period.

So, do i take from your post - that from the date of being declared a bankrupt - *there is no more communication between I and the OA, ISI -* unless i get extra income over my agreed RLE amount?

Also, what event is it that i use as the date when i'm declared a bankrupt? When i appear in court, when i get a leter from the OA saying i am bankrupt?? 

Am planning to go bankrupt in May this year and am doing what i can to get under the RLE guidelines so that an IPA or IPO does not get triggered.

Cheers,

BreakOnThru


----------



## Stuboy

breakonthru said:


> ..yes, exactly during the 1 year bankruptcy period.
> 
> So, do i take from your post - that from the date of being declared a bankrupt - *there is no more communication between I and the OA, ISI -* unless i get extra income over my agreed RLE amount?
> 
> Also, what event is it that i use as the date when i'm declared a bankrupt? When i appear in court, when i get a leter from the OA saying i am bankrupt??
> 
> Am planning to go bankrupt in May this year and am doing what i can to get under the RLE guidelines so that an IPA or IPO does not get triggered.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BreakOnThru



I am not sure what the newer protocol on the court appearance is (i.e. whether you are still required to appear in court or not) you have two court appearances, the date of the first is the date you are declared bankrupt by the judge (this is the date from which you are bankrupt, and you receive a letter from the court confirming that) the second date (approx a month later) is to allow time for creditors to challenge your bankruptcy, and during which, you must advertise your bankruptcy. If you have made your advertisements and crossed all your t's, dotted the i's etc. the Judge declares that you have passed that sitting.

Following your first sitting you will be asked to make contact with a representative of the OA (the rep was outside the court after my first sitting taking peoples details/answering questions) s/he will arrange to get a statement of income from you. Once you supply this, and your living circumstances, they will apply the figures to a costing excel template and inform you whether you will need to make a voluntary payment (Payment Agreement) to them monthly. If you are deemed to be over the RLE and refuse to make the voluntary payment, the OA will go to court to get a Payment Order, this is a court appointed order that is hard to get adjusted or get out of. 

You don't want one of these; if your income goes down it is hard to get it adjusted as that must be done in court and that takes time/costs money.
The Payment Agreement can be adjusted on a days notice if your income goes up or down, just by e-mailing your case manager. My understanding now is that there is a system of good faith on the part of the OA as regards keeping them informed if your income or circumstances change. I have never had the OA contact me seeking an update as I would stay in touch at least every 6 months as per the agreement. When my income changed, i informed the OA immediately with payslips, and alterations to the PA were implemented and the standing order changed.
I have found them very good to deal with, they are under-resourced with many new bankruptcies, but are prompt and reasonable.

Sorry about the long answer, hope it helps.


----------



## Stuboy

breakonthru said:


> ..*there is no more communication between I and the OA, ISI -*



I should probably say that it is a very light touch experience (certainly in my experience anyway) they do not micromanage your life, you do not have to clear purchases with them, they do not view your bank statements. The main causes I have had to have contact with the OA is due to continuing harassment from banks and their legal representatives post bankruptcy. in these circumstances the OA Representative has directly contacted the former creditor directly with instruction to cease contact.

On a personal note (and I realise that all cases are completely unique) the entire process has provided a huge amount of relief to my wife and I (we are both bankrupt). 
there is no more ducking and diving with creditors, borrowing from family to pay a bit here and there. No bank meeting where they crawl through your statement looking at your spend history.
We now have certainty with a definite exit this year once the new legislation is commenced. 

I would also say, be prepared to potentially lose ALL assets. We kept our car as it was worth little or nothing anyway, however, we lost our house. But we were prepared for that from the outset and went into the process with our eyes wide open.

Anyone that tells you that you will *definitely* keep your house is wrong. You *could* in certain circumstances but it depends on your situation. Take advice from a professional who knows the process, there are some excellent people on here that you can quiz, but sit down with someone and go over everything in detail and in person.

IF you can afford a PIP to help with the application forms well and good (we did them ourselves in the end) but the ISI office were very helpful in pointing out alterations needed to forms which we needed to resubmit. 

Best of Luck and be sure you know what your getting into, because once you have your first sitting you can't change your mind. I saw someone trying to get it reversed in on the second sitting with me when the realities were kicking in and the Judge was having none of it.

Stuboy.


----------



## Matthew Moore

breakonthru said:


> ..yes, exactly during the 1 year bankruptcy period.
> 
> So, do i take from your post - that from the date of being declared a bankrupt - *there is no more communication between I and the OA, ISI -* unless i get extra income over my agreed RLE amount?
> 
> Also, what event is it that i use as the date when i'm declared a bankrupt? When i appear in court, when i get a leter from the OA saying i am bankrupt??
> 
> Am planning to go bankrupt in May this year and am doing what i can to get under the RLE guidelines so that an IPA or IPO does not get triggered.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> BreakOnThru



Everything Stuboy said is spot on. They are really easy to deal with if you are fair to them. It's worth noting that although it is relatively light touch, there are huge powers to make the bankruptcy difficult so honesty is the best policy.
I imagine with the new 1 year bankruptcy they will be intouch 3 times at most. In the beginning, middle and end. Have a look at this post on my blog and scroll down to "IPA04 Income Assessment (1)". This will show you the form they use to assess your income.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Matthew Moore

Stuboy said:


> I am not sure what the newer protocol on the court appearance is (i.e. whether you are still required to appear in court or not) you have two court appearances, the date of the first is the date you are declared bankrupt by the judge (this is the date from which you are bankrupt, and you receive a letter from the court confirming that) the second date (approx a month later) is to allow time for creditors to challenge your bankruptcy, and during which, you must advertise your bankruptcy. If you have made your advertisements and crossed all your t's, dotted the i's etc. the Judge declares that you have passed that sitting.



I think that second sitting will be gone once the new bill is enacted.


----------



## breakonthru

Thanks to Matthew and Stuboy for their responses thus far!

Interesting to see that the 'IPA04 Income Assessment Form' has the following line - 'Self-Employed Income - Management Accounts for last quarter and Last Tax Return'..

While i'm currently earning rent from the properties i let - this 'rent roll' will obviously 'stop' once i'm declared bankrupt with all assets handed over to the OA.

So therefore, it would not make sense to include this 'income' as part of an IPA / IPO assessment!!

I suppose that should be obvious to the OA / ISI 

______

It's always great to hear and read other's stories of how they have found the bankruptcy route thus far. I personally think it's a no-brainer from my perspective for the following reasons -

a) No more phone calls from tenants about broken heating systems, i've repaired them as much as i can - can't afford to pay more.
b) No calls from creditors looking for this and that.
c) No more tax returns, accountancy fees etc.
d) No more payments with surcharges to Revenue for taxes due.
f) No chance of creditors getting our inheritance from both sets of grandparents as we'll be free of bankruptcy before they kick the bucket!
g) No need to make LPT payments that have built up over the years, ditto Irish Water bills for all the properties, etc.

______

So we'll stick to renting for the next few years in a great part of town and build up some savings post bankruptcy for an eventual house purchase down the road.

BreakOnThru


----------



## Silvio Dante

MikeL2007 said:


> Exactly the same plan here Silvio.



Hi Mike,

Would you be kind enough to contact Willie Penrose and push the commencement order?
I'm happy it's imminent but the election is likely to be called any day and after all the heavy lifting that was done to get it passed it would be awful for it to not commence in this dail.

Anyone else involved should also contact local rep and/or email info@justice.ie  and ask when it will commence.


----------



## Stuboy

Silvio Dante said:


> Hi Mike,
> 
> Would you be kind enough to contact Willie Penrose and push the commencement order?
> I'm happy it's imminent but the election is likely to be called any day and after all the heavy lifting that was done to get it passed it would be awful for it to not commence in this dail.
> 
> Anyone else involved should also contact local rep and/or email info@justice.ie  and ask when it will commence.


As I'm sure everyone has heard, the Dail will be dissolved next week, I would urge anyone with an interest to follow Silvio's suggestion and get onto Justice for this to be commenced or else we could be waiting quite a while!


----------



## MikeL2007

Contact made with Willie Penrose and Pat Rabbitte guys.

As soon as I hear will let you know.  Hopefully that fact the Labour Ard Fheis is on this weekend will bring this back into the Public eye if there's no movement on it by then.


----------



## Silvio Dante

I got a "we acknowledge receipt of your email" reply from Justice
My third since Christmas.


----------



## MikeL2007

Thanks Silvio, must admit I'm at 'bricking it' point now.

Surely given all the hullabaloo pre Christmas there's no risk of this not getting in.


----------



## newlife

Not sure if its already mentioned here....if you do the 1 year Bankruptcy is there an extended period after if your financial circumstances change in the meantime? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Silvio Dante

MikeL2007 said:


> Thanks Silvio, must admit I'm at 'bricking it' point now.
> 
> Surely given all the hullabaloo pre Christmas there's no risk of this not getting in.



None whatsoever I would think. It's now law.
However, a risk of a few more months before commencement now exists.
The break up of the Dail for election shouldn't be a huge factor as it needs no further input from Dail, it just needs Frances Fitzgerald to sign a commencement order.
However the real danger is this order isn't signed by election date, then we could be looking at months.


Thanks for heads up on Labour Ard Fheis, this should ensure some urgency.
They shouldn't be allowed take all the kudos for this until it is operational and this should be pointed out to Lab reps.


----------



## TLO

After all the effort that Willie Penrose put into this legislation I'm delighted to see that he has been re-elected in Longford-Westmeath.


----------



## theshopkeeper

The herald is quoting Willie Penrose as saying the one year term has NOT been passed.  Site rules do not allow me to post a link but its on the herald website titled preschool and bankruptcy term at risk.
What is going on???


----------



## Stuboy

theshopkeeper said:


> The herald is quoting Willie Penrose as saying the one year term has NOT been passed.  Site rules do not allow me to post a link but its on the herald website titled preschool and bankruptcy term at risk.
> What is going on???


I've just read it, I'm not too sure what specific part of the legislation he is referring to as the ISI has published the release dates for everyone currently in bankruptcy.
however I am aware that the removal of the requirement to attend two court sittings has not yet been enacted...could this actually be what is referred to...it wouldn't be the first time that a media outlet has bent a quote to get a headline.

I also see the independent ran the story about the childcare aspect and put in a picture of Penrose but made no mention of the bankruptcy element in the body of the text. it seems that the proposed measures mentioned in the article are not underpinned by legislation...this is not the case in the bankruptcy amendments as the legislation was drafted, approved, signed by the president and, crucially, commenced by the minister for justice. 

there may be a political element of scaremongering by media, it is INM afterall.


----------



## MikeL2007

Yes, given that it's been published by the ISI, made it to the Aras and back to the Minister for signature don't think there's any reason to be concerned about the main elements of the Bill.  Could be a smaller element as Stuboy highlights.


----------



## MikeL2007

TLO said:


> After all the effort that Willie Penrose put into this legislation I'm delighted to see that he has been re-elected in Longford-Westmeath.



Same here


----------

