Better job = No better off????

[frequentflyer]

My wife and I are now in year 3 of our iva.
My wife has an opportunity to go for a better job within her organisation which would mean a big increase to her salary, this new job would be full time as opposed to the p/t hours she works at present. In making the decision on whether she should go for the new job she needs to know how this will impact on our iva payments?
If we would be obliged to pay into the iva the extra amount that she will be earning then obviously there is no incentive whatsoever to go for it. I am kind of thinking that view would be that if you are able to pay what is left of your current salary after deducting living expenses into the iva now then if you then are attracting a higher salary then the creditors would take all of it.
I would be grateful if anyone who has faced a similar situation or knows the answer to my query would post back and let me know.

Thanks FF

[Adam Davies]

Hi
The short answer is yes creditors may expect all the rise, less any increased expenditure, however some IPs will work with you and allow you to enjoy some of the extra money. You need to chat through this with your IP. Probably best to take the job even if you do not feel the benefit because you will once the IVA has finished
Regards

[northumbrian69]

I thought you were allowed to keep 50% of any payrise otherwise what's the point of going from part time to full time, doesn't sound fair to me, I know I wouldn't work extra hours unless there was some benefit to me as well as my creditors.
Surely creditors would be happy with 50% of a hefty payrise, it's better than no rise at all if frequentflyer's wife declines to take the job.
I'm sure your IP can negotiate that you keep at least 50% of your payrise, good luck[:D][:D]

[frequentflyer]

So basically it would appear that the rules state that all the additional funds should be paid into the IVA but there is a way around it to reduce it to 50%?? Can this 50% be agreed by the IP or does it have to be agreed by the creditors?
Thanks
FF

[Shining]

I think to be able to keep a little extra of the disposable income is great as every little helps. I would definitely run this by your IP as I personally would need a little incentive to work the extra although I realise in the long term it would benefit you after the IVA concludes.

[frequentflyer]

We are with Grant Thornton having been transferred from Wilson Phillips a few months ago. Is this something we should contact them about? My feeling is that I dont want her to go for this job if she will not reap any financial benefits at all otherwise she is working extra hours just to get extra money for our creditors what would be the point!! We would need to know with some assurance that this 50% situation was in fact the case and not leave it to chance. From what I have read so far this would appear to be a grey area......

FF

[kallis3]

I would check what it says in your proposal/chairmans report about payrises.

You could also ring GT up and ask what their stance is on this.

[lukeofyorkshire]

It is indeed a grey area, going to check mine when I get home. My boss told me today he wants me to be Head of Security at another site and I will get a hefty payrise.

I'm not going to do it if there is no financial incentive for myself. I already work 60 hours a week but as my site is vacant I just watch DVD's, surf the net and read lol. If I transfer I am going to be working 60 hours on my feet, 12 staff to manage, rotas to organise for 24/7 coverage, pay queries, holidays and constant phone calls when you are at home.

That may sound like I do not want to pay my creditors back more than I am, it's not the case. I took this job initially so I could pay as much as possible, I intend to quit these hours when out of the IVA.

Oddly enough my building has a similar address to a building up the road where GT have an office and I get alot of GT visitors coming here!

[Hugo]

Demotivating isn't it!
If the share was a little fairer maybe more people would accept overtime/shift work/higher paid positions benefiting themselves and creditors - win/win.
My case officer advised me that if I returned to working unsocial hours my shift pay (not a small sum) would eventually be paid over after review time. Personally I would not work 22.00 to 06.00 for five years for nothing when I could stay on normal days!
As things stand my DI would still stay the same but the creditor has lost potential extra payments.

regards

[MelanieGiles]

50% is fair, to leave inventive to work harder, but at the end of the day the answer will lie within the IVA proposal documents - so do check this out with your IP to be sure.

You should also think about life after the IVA, and to turn this job down could be a missed opportunity which you will all benefit from in the long term.

[Skippy]

I agree with Melanie that a 50/50 share is fair.

I do have to say that although I completely agree that you have to think about life after the IVA, unless it was a fantastic job (i.e. David Tennant's personal assistant!) I'd be reluctant to do a lot of extra hours if I had to hand over all the extra money.

[Adam Davies]

Hi
It is a difficult one.
If your income drops then you ask your creditors to reduce your payments, if income increases I can see why creditors would expect more, however at the same time there is no incentive to take on greater responsibility and sometimes extra hours if you do not benefit financially.
Regards

[Julie]

With the risk of being shot down here, I'd go for the better job. Yes you have to pay more to the creditors and you may not see the financial benefits, but thats not going to last forever.

The personal satisfaction and potential career path would appeal to me more.

[kallis3]

I have to say that I agree with Julie.

You may have to pay across more to the IVA, but once it is finished, the money is yours to do with as you wish.

[Skippy]

I can see that side as well Julie, to me it really depends on the job and whether it was something I really wanted to do and what the prospects were.