A fair result would be a 50/50 split of the profit, suggest this to your IP, otherwise you have simply risked your own money to benefit your creditors.
Personally I can't see what the difference is between having shares and premium bonds - surely any windfall would be classed as the same on both parts.
So why force the sale of the shares !
Andy's idea of a 50:50 split seems the fairest - let's hope your IP can be convinced.
Sharing from experiences of dealing with debt
There is a solution for everyone .... Just need to stay positive !
that's what I thought Andy, 50/50 split would be fair but we did suggest this to no avail.
as for the premium bonds lulu, the same would apply, if by any chance we won anything the whole amount would be payable!
Unfortunately it seems there is nothing we can do however unfair it may seem. we took a risk with our hard saved cash and they are entitled to all the profit.
that's our motivation gone to make any more money or take any risks. we will stick with the bonds though with the very small chance of winning enough to clear all our debts. How lovely that would feel!
If the profit was £944 and the shares jointly owned then you may have to pay nothing at all as each windfall was below £500. Check your proposals as you may be entitled to up to £500 each!
Does the £944 include the £750 invested? The reason I ask this is it is not yet possible to make a £944 profit on Royal Mail shares as no one received an allocation above £750 and the price today would give a profit of about £500 after dealing fees. If you have already sold then your profit maybe less than £500 which you might be able to keep
The profit is currently on paper and not a cash item. If you won the lottery it is a windfall because that is cash but you have not actually got anything at all.
I doubt if your IP can force you to sell the shares and if you hold on to them until the IVA is over I think you are okay. Get legal advice because I feel this is wrong.
I bet that is right Micheal, but we have actually now sold the shares, we haven't paid them the profit yet as it hasn't cleared. I felt it was a bit risky spending our savings on shares given our circumstances but thought the risk would be the shares loosing money, not having to pay all profit to IVA. We could just as easily have lost money, this was our risk and it didn't pay off but for the wrong reasons. I wish i'd have seen your reply before we sold as I think that would have been a very good argument.
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by Michael Peoples
The profit is currently on paper and not a cash item. If you won the lottery it is a windfall because that is cash but you have not actually got anything at all.
I doubt if your IP can force you to sell the shares and if you hold on to them until the IVA is over I think you are okay. Get legal advice because I feel this is wrong.
A windfall does not have to be a cash item - it can be the appreciation of an asset - and thus my belief is the gain should be paid into the IVA. Why is this unfair when I imagine creditors are writing off debt here, and have the right to benefit from a debtor's improved circumstances - so long as this is in line with the IVA proposal?
We would havebeen hhappy to pay thrm a percentage, the reasonI feel iit's unfair is that had we not have invested the xreditors would have received nothing at all. We could have simply left the money in the house or bank.
We took a risk with our own mone, we sshouldbe able to keep at least a smallamountof the profit.
You used your share of bonuses etc to buy these shares and these are excluded items from your IVA. It seems unfair to me that any profit from excluded items must go to creditors and this could mean that IPs can take the interest from the deposit account where you left your contingency money!
The shares could have dropped in value and do you really think creditors would give you your money back!!!!!
I have to say and I'm probably a lone voice on this thread that the idea of a fast buck being made on shares whilst in an IVA doesn't seem right. Purely on moralistic grounds before going into the technicalities of whether shares are an asset or windfall etc.
We are in an IVA because we are technically insolvent - unable to pay our debts and the creditors are often accepting a fraction of their original debt owed. Some people (and I'm not one of them) struggle with this concept for solvent people let alone those of us in IVAs!. These are moral arguments.
But in IVA terms then I compare it to the equity release clause or the overtime clauses where there are people working their butts off to make ends meet and quite a few in this forum end up paying thousands over to the IVA to reduce the debt or finish early. Creditors prefer us to have interest only mortgages to enable the maximum amount to be paid over to the IVA. In any case we are discussing an issue that Pattys I.P has already made a decision on . Patty has done the right thing to take his of her advice and acted upon it.
Last edited by winter_blues on Sat Nov 02, 2013 6:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
That's what my husband said Mark, although I really wouldn't have expected them to give us our money back if the shares had dropped, haha!
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by winter_blues
I have to say and I'm probably a lone voice on this thread that the idea of a fast buck being made on shares whilst in an IVA doesn't seem right. Purely on moralistic grounds before going into the technicalities of whether shares are an asset or windfall etc.
We are in an IVA because we are technically insolvent - unable to pay our debts and the creditors are often accepting a fraction of their original debt owed. Some people (and I'm not one of them) struggle with this concept for solvent people let alone those of us in IVAs!. These are moral arguments.
But in IVA terms then I compare it to the equity release clause or the overtime clauses where there are people working their butts off to make ends meet and quite a few in this forum end up paying thousands over to the IVA to reduce the debt or finish early. Creditors prefer us to have interest only mortgages to enable the maximum amount to be paid over to the IVA. In any case we are discussing an issue that Pattys I.P has already made a decision on . Patty has done the right thing to take his of her advice and acted upon it.
