This is something I weighed up when initially working with a PIP to see if I could enter a PIA of some form.
My situation was caused firstly by my business going under. I then got my old job back with previous employer but, after a year with them, they went out of business and I was unemployed for over a year. I went back to education and got a job out of it, but that company was struggling and let about 80% of the staff go. I then worked a (really) low paid job for about 4 months before finally getting something better paid, but only on a one year contract (which has since been renewed for a second year).
The PIP has told me that I don't have enough income to structure a PIA so I applied for Bankruptcy (which was my first preference anyway).
But here was my thinking on the whole PIA v bankruptcy issue and the failing of the new laws.
Let's say I could have entered a PIA and was paying 400 per month on that arrangement for 6 or 7 years (whatever the term is under one of the 3 arrangements).
My job, indeed most jobs these days, is not guaranteed. I'm not even permanent; only on a rolling 1 year contract. So anything could happen with my situation at the end of that year.
Lets say that I am paying fine for the first 2 years but am then let go and can no longer meet my agreed repayments? are there any safeguards in place in the legislation to protect the individual on those cases or are you put back to square one and have to apply for bankruptcy?
This means you have essentially added 2 years to a bankruptcy as you now have to go through that entire bankruptcy process (5 years controlled income under bankruptcy and the 2 years that you already did on the PIA).
In my opinion this makes the PIA options pointless, unless you are dead set in trying to stay in your home. I would much prefer the short, sharp shock of Bankruptcy as opposed to the uncertainty of a PIA.
What do others think?
My situation was caused firstly by my business going under. I then got my old job back with previous employer but, after a year with them, they went out of business and I was unemployed for over a year. I went back to education and got a job out of it, but that company was struggling and let about 80% of the staff go. I then worked a (really) low paid job for about 4 months before finally getting something better paid, but only on a one year contract (which has since been renewed for a second year).
The PIP has told me that I don't have enough income to structure a PIA so I applied for Bankruptcy (which was my first preference anyway).
But here was my thinking on the whole PIA v bankruptcy issue and the failing of the new laws.
Let's say I could have entered a PIA and was paying 400 per month on that arrangement for 6 or 7 years (whatever the term is under one of the 3 arrangements).
My job, indeed most jobs these days, is not guaranteed. I'm not even permanent; only on a rolling 1 year contract. So anything could happen with my situation at the end of that year.
Lets say that I am paying fine for the first 2 years but am then let go and can no longer meet my agreed repayments? are there any safeguards in place in the legislation to protect the individual on those cases or are you put back to square one and have to apply for bankruptcy?
This means you have essentially added 2 years to a bankruptcy as you now have to go through that entire bankruptcy process (5 years controlled income under bankruptcy and the 2 years that you already did on the PIA).
In my opinion this makes the PIA options pointless, unless you are dead set in trying to stay in your home. I would much prefer the short, sharp shock of Bankruptcy as opposed to the uncertainty of a PIA.
What do others think?