Any bankrupts willing to make a submission on reducing the bankruptcy term?

Brendan Burgess

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
52,091
There has been a fair amount of discussion of bankruptcy on askaboutmoney. Would anyone who has actually been declared bankrupt in Ireland like to give us their views on reducing the term from 3 years to one year?

Brendan
 
Hi Brendan,

I have stated this previously on Askaboutmoney; reducing the term from 3 to 1 year will not really make much of a difference unless the the income payment order is also reduced. Being a company director is of no interest to me, nor is running for the Dail. Therefore the only effect that bankruptcy has on me is the IPO. In my opinion Bankruptcy lasts for 5 years; the duration of the IPO.
It is also worth noting that by the time I am free of the IPO, in 2019, my family (and I am sure it is similar for many people going through insolvency in ireland) will have lived on the breadline since the end of 2008. Since that time we have lived hand to mouth. This will effectively make our bankruptcy duration 10 years. That will be 25% of my life, and 50% of my adult life living in severely restricted financial circumstances; the first five years due to dire economic conditions, the second 5 years in an enforced payment order. My eldest child will be an adult when I exit 'the process' and my youngest will have lived his entire life like that.

Currently in Ireland we have a two tier bankruptcy system, those with money (e.g. Ivan Yates et al) get a quick 1 year fix in the UK, while your average Joe gets stung for 5 years.

So to summarise, in my view the Bankruptcy period on its own is not the issue, the IPO must be affected as well or its meaningless.

I will consider putting my situation and thoughts into a submission, if it can have some effect it will be worth it.
 
Hi Stuboy.

(b) in section 85D (“Bankruptcy payment orders”), as inserted by section 157 of the Personal Insolvency Act 2012, by the substitution for subsection (3) of the following: “(3) An order made under subsection (1) shall have effect for no longer than 3 years from the date of the order coming into operation, and where, during the order’s validity, the court has varied the order under subsection (5) such variation shall not cause the order to have effect for a period of more than 3 years, and in any event, any order made under subsection (1) or varied under subsection (5) shall cease to have effect on the 4th anniversary of the date on which the bankrupt was adjudicated bankrupt.”,

This is what the Penrose Bill is proposing:
An absolute worst case scenario of IPO ceasing on 4th anniversary of adjudication so it least chops the dreaded nightmare scenario of effectively 8 years bankruptcy (3 + 5 IPO) in half.

Please ensure you make a submission and be sure to show (as your post above vividly does) the unnecessary extra turmoil the longer period causes.
You'd need a heart of stone not to empathise with the suffering you've endured.
Let them see it, there are some very decent conscientious members on this committee.

Good Luck
 
Last edited:
Is anyone else intending to make a submission to the committee? Is there anyone else on the forum that is an Irish Bankrupt?
I am willing to consider making a joint submission with other Irish Bankrupts if anyone is interested.
 
Stuboy said:
Is anyone else intending to make a submission to the committee? Is there anyone else on the forum that is an Irish Bankrupt?
I am willing to consider making a joint submission with other Irish Bankrupts if anyone is interested.
Click to expand...

Stuboy,

I really think you should make an individual submission, each case is different.
Without sounding like I'm coaching, I believe if you lay out your experience it may be a very important submission and one that will deal with the huge human toll a longer period inflicts.
I'd centre your submission on the basis that if a 1 year period had been available to you 5 years ago you would reluctantly have availed of it and your creditors would have largely got the same as they are now going to get.
However the prospect of facing 12 years (and now still effectively 5 at least) was too daunting and you had to spend years trying to fend it off if at all humanly possible.

If a one year period had been available I suspect you would have bitten the bullet 5 years ago at least and would now be financially and mentally in a much better place (4 years free of bankruptcy and at least a year free of IPO).
I think your analogy of a "lost decade during the most productive years of your adult life" is very powerful. The anguish this has placed as you watch your children growing up now old enough to see the anxiety and pressure is also a very powerful argument for a short sharp solution as opposed to a multi year drip feed purgatorial one.

I too have found this element the hardest part to deal with (far more so than the financial side) and will be making similar points in my submission as to how a longer period totally unnecessarily inflicts punishment on the bankrupt and his family long after his affairs have been dealt with by the OA.
Both the struggle to attain a job while under the cloud of bankruptcy (and anyone who says almost any employer wont factor it in when considering hiring isn't living in the real World) and the lack of incentive to earn if lucky enough to have one due to IPO and garnishing is also hugely counterproductive to all.

Go for it Stuboy, even getting it down and in will be cathartic in itself and trust me there are many members who will read this and be heavily persuaded.

I agree with Brendan, OA should have power to keep pure messers who hide wealth from OA inside bankruptcy until OA is satisfied.
Everyone else should have all their assets dealt with asap by the OA and in the vast majority of such cases 1 year is more than enough for that to occur
The bankruptcy period should be solely there to allow the OA to quickly and efficiently deal with the affairs (assets) of the bankrupt, let him breath in deep, take the shock to the system for a year then get back up and live and contribute again. Everything else is unnecessary and uneconomical punishment.
 
Thanks for your reply Silvio.
There are some very interesting points in here that were in the back of my mind but this has brought them into focus.
I have planned to write my submission over the weekend. For all other submitting, good luck.
On another note I received an e-mail from Neo Financial services on the topic of submission to committee, the text of the e-mail can be viewed on their website [broken link removed]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top