# Coming back home with unsecure debt



## Auslang (20 Jan 2021)

Hi guys,

Just putting this here as this forum has great opinions and advice.

I have bought a property with my ex-husband who fled the country a few years later leaving me with an unsustainable situation that dragged on for really long.
I have emigrated to UK and live here since.  

To cut a very long story short, with the agreement of PTSB, I finally sold my negative equity property at the end of 2019.
It turns out that almost at the same time, PTSB sold the loan, which now became unsecured debt, to Start Mortgages.

The shortfall of the sale is approximately 70k, not including the arrears which could amount to about 180k. I have never engaged with Start Mortgages on this or had any communication with them.

After 7 years living away, an opportunity now exists for me to return home. I have a small amount (25k) which I have managed to save these last few years to try and rebuild some sort of security. I have no intention of applying for a mortgage again, but I am trying to build up savings for retirement, since I have zero chance of owning property.

I understand that staying in the UK probably means it is unlikely for Start to pursue my debt further. I really want to move on from this after 11 years of fighting which resulted in losing my home, and I definitely am not willing to hand over the little I saved to a vulture fund. But on a personal level, I really want to go home. As I see, I have 3 choices:


Stay where I am.
Go back and engage with Start and seek an arrangement
Go back and not engage with Start and hope they won’t notice that I am back

My question is: what would you do in my situation? I don’t want the forum to solve my problems for me but I need to put this out there as I cannot think clearly at the moment. Any comments would be much appreciated.


----------



## RedOnion (20 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> I understand that staying in the UK probably means it is unlikely for Start to pursue my debt further.


That might be a false understanding.  It'd be true if it were a small amount, less than 10k for example, as the legal costs would outweigh what they recover.  But you're talking about a significant amount here.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (20 Jan 2021)

Engage briefly with Start.

But if you don't get a quick write off, then go bankrupt quickly and be debt-free after a year.

Brendan


----------



## Auslang (20 Jan 2021)

RedOnion said:


> That might be a false understanding.  It'd be true if it were a small amount, less than 10k for example, as the legal costs would outweigh what they recover.  But you're talking about a significant amount here.



The value of the debt is large but what they could actually recover if they came after me is (probably) small for the trouble.


----------



## RedOnion (20 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> The value of the debt is large but what they could actually recover if they came after me is (probably) small for the trouble.


But, you have 25k?  That's worth pursuing.


----------



## Auslang (20 Jan 2021)

RedOnion said:


> But, you have 25k?  That's worth pursuing.



So do you believe that they would pursue legal action to recover money that they don't know exists in another country? It seems far fetched but I don't know much about this, just going by other threads I read here.


----------



## RedOnion (20 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> So do you believe that they would pursue legal action to recover money that they don't know exists in another country?


There's more than 10k owed. It's worth their while investigating whether or not it's worth pursuing. There are certain things they can do before spending any real money. Do you have a job? Have you a LinkedIn profile where you've stated your title? Facebook? I can find out a lot about a person without even having their address.

I'm not saying they will pursue you in UK, but it's naïve to assume they won't, given the amount involved.


----------



## Jim2007 (20 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> So do you believe that they would pursue legal action to recover money that they don't know exists in another country? It seems far fetched but I don't know much about this, just going by other threads I read here.



Of course it is worth pursuing.  They may not do it themselves, there are plenty of agencies out their who specialize in this kind of thing.


----------



## Pinoy adventure (20 Jan 2021)

I would chose number 2.come back and engage and try work things out.
It may work or it may not work who knows but if you do engage and work sumthing out you will have less too worry about.


----------



## Steven Barrett (20 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> I really want to move on from this after 11 years of fighting which resulted in losing my home, and I definitely am not willing to hand over the little I saved to a vulture fund. But on a personal level, I really want to go home.



You owe €250,000. You don't get to move on and keep the money that you have squirreled away too. It doesn't work like that. To move on, you will probably have to give up your savings. Given it will mean that 90% of your debt will be wiped out, that's a pretty good deal. I'd look into what Brendan said, look at going bankrupt in the UK and in 2022, you can start all over again debt free.


----------



## Futurelookin (20 Jan 2021)

Have you looked into the statute of limitations on the debt?


----------



## Auslang (20 Jan 2021)

SBarrett said:


> You owe €250,000. You don't get to move on and keep the money that you have squirreled away too. It doesn't work like that. To move on, you will probably have to give up your savings. Given it will mean that 90% of your debt will be wiped out, that's a pretty good deal. I'd look into what Brendan said, look at going bankrupt in the UK and in 2022, you can start all over again debt free.



I haven't squirreled anything away, I work, live a frugal life and have a savings account. I am very much aware that things don't work like that, I have been living through this nightmare for many years which was not of my making and as a consequence I lost my home. I am just trying to think of a future for myself that does not mean poverty in old age.


----------



## Thirsty (20 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> with the agreement of PTSB, I finally sold my negative equity property at the end of 2019.


PTSB must have known of the shortfall at the time of the sale? What did they say about it?


----------



## Auslang (20 Jan 2021)

Thirsty said:


> PTSB must have known of the shortfall at the time of the sale? What did they say about it?



They have consented to the sale but were not willing to address the shortfall. Even thought the mortgage was clearly unsustainable, it took many years of trying for them to allow the sale. The arrears accumulated for this reason.


----------



## Auslang (20 Jan 2021)

Futurelookin said:


> Have you looked into the statute of limitations on the debt?



I haven't, but I believe there would be at least 5 years to go as the sale was only completed at the end of 2019.


----------



## elcato (20 Jan 2021)

I'd go for option 3 but expect that they may catch up with you. I think option 1 and 3 are similar in that sense. It seema to me a question of whether you contact them or not which I would not. It will make no differance to them whether you initiated contact or not _imo_, they just want to maximise what they can get. Your only advantage of staying put is, as Brendan pointed out, that bankruptcy is probably easier as a negotiation tactic.


----------



## Thirsty (20 Jan 2021)

> They have consented to the sale but were not willing to address the shortfall.


I think it would be worth your while to dig out the correspondence; they must have written something in the letter agreeing to the sale?


----------



## Jim Stafford (21 Jan 2021)

RedOnion said:


> I can find out a lot about a person without even having their address.


As RedOnion suggests, Start can easily do online searches to track you down.

Not only will Start chase you, but they will chase your ex-husband.

No need to go bankrupt. (If you went bankrupt you would lose your £25,000.) If you make an honest approach to Start (particularly if you are living in the UK) then you should reach a deal. You should send your correspondence on a Without Prejudice basis.

Jim Stafford


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (21 Jan 2021)

Jim Stafford said:


> No need to go bankrupt. (If you went bankrupt you would lose your £25,000.) If you make an honest approach to Start (particularly if you are living in the UK) then you should reach a deal. You should send your correspondence on a Without Prejudice basis.




I have zero experience of this myself. But is an average customer well equipped to deal with Start? (I don't think I would).

Would the OP not need some kind of professional assistance?


----------



## elcato (21 Jan 2021)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> But is an average customer well equipped to deal with Start? (I don't think I would).


I agree. Plus why initiate it. Let them come to you and even then I would not acknowledge receipt of anything at first. They can send a lot of intimidating letters but a lot is just trying to get a reaction.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (21 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> I have been living through this nightmare for many years



Face up to it and either negotiate a deal as suggested by Jim or go bankrupt. 

Don't hope it will go away. It might but you will always be wondering. 

Brendan


----------



## Allpartied (21 Jan 2021)

I think you would be better off to declare bankruptcy in the UK.
You should look into moving your savings into a pension account, if you have one, or setting one up.

The UK Bankruptcy laws will not allow creditors to touch pension funds, particularly small ones which you will have.

Former Agriculture minister, Ivan Yates, declared himself bankrupt in the UK back in 2013. He was in receipt of a 75k per year pension from the Irish stat and his creditors couldn't touch it.  They still can't touch it. So if it is good enough for people who owed the banks millions of euros it is good enough for you.

For the benefit of moderators this is not libelous, or defamation, though it is scandalous.  Ivan has had his massive pension since he was 42, and gets it for the rest of his life.  Most of which he spends on the airwaves complaining about people surviving on a fraction of his taxpayer funded bonanza.









						30 former government ministers receive pensions of over €100k
					

Bertie tops the list, followed by fellow former taoisigh Brian Cowen and Albert Reynolds…




					www.thejournal.ie
				












						Ivan Yates says he is broke and wants to make a fresh start
					

Former government minister and bookmaker will resume working on Newstalk’s breakfast show from tomorrow




					www.irishtimes.com
				




This story is an absolute indictment of the Irish banking system.  They forced this woman into selling her home, took every penny of the sale, then handed the rest of the loan on to a vulture fund.  They should be forced, by law, to engage with her and to help her overcome this appalling situation. The most obvious thing they could do , is buy the loan back from Start and write it off.


----------



## RedOnion (21 Jan 2021)

Allpartied said:


> I think you would be better off to declare bankruptcy in the UK.
> You should look into moving your savings into a pension account, if you have one, or setting one up.
> 
> The UK Bankruptcy laws will not allow creditors to touch pension funds, particularly small ones which you will have.


This is not always 100% correct. In the UK transfers into a pension scheme prior to bankruptcy, with the purpose of putting savings beyond the reach of creditors, can be reversed in some cases.


----------



## Allpartied (21 Jan 2021)

RedOnion said:


> This is not always 100% correct. In the UK transfers into a pension scheme prior to bankruptcy, with the purpose of putting savings beyond the reach of creditors, can be reversed in some cases.



I think the phrase is " exceptional contributions" and it applies to large sums of money being transferred .  

25k in the context of an average pension, that is peanuts and couldn't be, reasonably, considered as " exceptional. "


----------



## Saavy99 (21 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> After 7 years living away, an opportunity now exists for me to return home. I have a small amount (25k) which I have managed to save these last few years to try and rebuild some sort of security. I have no intention of applying for a mortgage again, but I am trying to build up savings for retirement, since I have zero chance of owning property.
> 
> I understand that staying in the UK probably means it is unlikely for Start to pursue my debt further. I really want to move on from this after 11 years of fighting which resulted in losing my home, and I definitely am not willing to hand over the little I saved to a vulture fund. But on a personal level, I really want to go home.



I presume you need to find a home or apartment to rent. You will need few thousand for deposit and rent, you will probably need to do up the place, buy furniture, moving cost have to be factored in etc.  There's nothing in the bank by way of interest so what ever you have left over , invest in good home safe and pop rest it in there. Good luck to you


----------



## Jim2007 (21 Jan 2021)

Allpartied said:


> I think you would be better off to declare bankruptcy in the UK.
> You should look into moving your savings into a pension account, if you have one, or setting one up.



Post BREXIT, I’m not sure that there is a requirement to recognize  such declarations.  And deliberately moving funds into a pension fund prior to declaring bankruptcy can be challenging as an attempt to defraud the creditors.


----------



## Allpartied (21 Jan 2021)

Jim2007 said:


> Post BREXI, I’m not sure that there is a requirement to recognize  such declarations.  And deliberately moving funds into a pension fund prior to declaring bankruptcy can be challenging as an attempt to defraud the creditors.


It's not deliberately moving funds into a pension to defraud creditors.  It's using some meagre savings to fund a meagre pension.  The movement of such a small amount of savings into a pension fund is perfectly justifiable
The rules on "exceptional contributions " are designed to stop the millionaire bankrupt from stashing a few hundred thousand  

No judge is going to declare such a small sum as an "exceptional contribution ".


----------



## RichInSpirit (21 Jan 2021)

Auslang said:


> The shortfall of the sale is approximately 70k, not including the arrears which could amount to about 180k.



The arrears figure of 180k might not be owing at all. I'm not sure in your case. Arrears is only a speedometer of the slowness of repayment.


----------



## Jim2007 (22 Jan 2021)

Allpartied said:


> It's not deliberately moving funds into a pension to defraud creditors.  It's using some meagre savings to fund a meagre pension.  The movement of such a small amount of savings into a pension fund is perfectly justifiable
> The rules on "exceptional contributions " are designed to stop the millionaire bankrupt from stashing a few hundred thousand
> 
> No judge is going to declare such a small sum as an "exceptional contribution ".



There is not one law for the rich and another for the poor.  And you have know idea how a judge would rule on such a claim.

The fact is that the OPs actions prior to bankruptcy will be reviewed and it will be flagged up.


----------



## Thirsty (22 Jan 2021)

Jim2007 said:


> There is not one law for the rich and another for the poor.


Now there, I would disagree.


----------



## elcato (22 Jan 2021)

Re: 25k to pension. You might as well just withdraw it from bank and have it under your mattress given the amount involved. Use Bertie-esque excuse when/if challenged.


----------



## Allpartied (22 Jan 2021)

Jim2007 said:


> There is not one law for the rich and another for the poor.  And you have know idea how a judge would rule on such a claim.
> 
> The fact is that the OPs actions prior to bankruptcy will be reviewed and it will be flagged up.



No, but there is a law relating to " exceptional contributions".   And this definition is geared towards stopping very wealthy people  stashing large sums of money out of the way of creditors. The word itself is quite vague and so would be open to a legal interpretaion. I can make a pretty good guess that this small contribution to a pension would be considered reasonable.  If she had 500k in a savings account and was moving the whole lot to a pension, then that would be different.
So, there is a difference and it is based on that word " exceptional". 
The alternative is to leave the money in a deposit account, where it will, almost certainly, be grabbed by the vultures.


----------



## Allpartied (22 Jan 2021)

Allpartied said:


> No, but there is a law relating to " exceptional contributions".   And this definition is geared towards stopping very wealthy people  stashing large sums of money out of the way of creditors. The word itself is quite vague and so would be open to a legal interpretaion. I can make a pretty good guess that this small contribution to a pension would be considered reasonable.  If she had 500k in a savings account and was moving the whole lot to a pension, then that would be different.
> So, there is a difference and it is based on that word " exceptional".
> 
> Sorry the word is " excessive"  , but the definition is still open to interpretation.  There are some basic guidelines in the UK to help with the interpretation.
> ...


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (22 Jan 2021)

This part seemed [broken link removed]in the UK guidelines



> There is no definition in the Act as to what may be considered an “excessive” contribution.  Whether contributions to a pension are excessive or not would depend on whether the contributions unfairly prejudiced the bankrupt’s creditors (see [broken link removed]), and this, in turn, would depend on the bankrupt’s circumstances at the time he/she made the contributions [[broken link removed]].  For example, contributions made at the expense of a bankrupt’s business capital or other household expenses may be considered to be excessive. * Similarly, consideration should be given to the bankrupt’s income and lifestyle and historical pension contributions. * Contributions made by one bankrupt who continues to make contributions during difficult times may not be considered to be excessive whereas payments started by another bankrupt in similar circumstances may be considered to be so.
> 
> HM Revenue and Customs set a limit (for tax relief purposes) on the amount that can be contributed to a pension – this being 15% of remuneration.  *This figure should give the official receiver a reference point when considering whether payments to a pension by a bankrupt are excessive.*



OP should also consider that credit will be probably pretty restricted for a long time.

You wouldn't want to go through insolvency/bankruptcy and _then _realise you needed a new car or something else essential for your business.


----------



## elcato (22 Jan 2021)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> OP should also consider that credit will be probably pretty restricted for a long time.


That's gone regardless surely given the debt


----------



## Allpartied (22 Jan 2021)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> This part seemed [broken link removed]in the UK guidelines
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The 15% of remuneration is a guide and could be open to explanation.  For example, if the 25k was saved over a 5 or 6 year period, it could be defined within that limit.  I am only suggesting the pension option as a safeguard in any bankruptcy process. 

Obviously, if the OP can avoid bankruptcy that would be preferable.  However, safeguarding their life savings is also a calculation and the debt is much larger than those savings. 

Once a person is a discharged bankrupt, they can start to build up a credit history again, should they chose to do so. Although they will, probably, have to pay a much higher interest rate, as only certain companies would be open to them.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (22 Jan 2021)

elcato said:


> That's gone regardless surely given the debt


I didn't suggest otherwise  



Allpartied said:


> The 15% of remuneration is a guide and could be open to explanation.



Yes, the guidelines seem to suggest an "in the round" approach. But without direct knowledge of cases (and I have none) we are speculating on how it would be treated.


----------

