When any individual enters into an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA), they are making a formal agreement with their unsecured creditors to repay a chunk of their debts over a finite duration. The length of an IVA is five years in most cases though it may be shorter when, for instance, the borrower offers unsecured lenders a ‘one-off’ lump sum settlement. The cash might come from the sale of the debtor’s property or it could be money given by the debtor’s friends or family explicitly to permit him or her to settle the money they owe. However, the majority of IVAs are based on monthly payments coming from the debtor’s disposable income for a time period of five years. The question comes up, how does the person in debt take care of secured lenders?
Secured lenders expect to receive, during the duration of the IVA as well as afterwards, the full contractual repayments on secured loans made to the person in debt by them. A mortgage is a secured debt and so is a Hire Purchase agreement. A person who has a mortgage or who has bought a car via a HP agreement is expected to make their regular mortgage repayments to their mortgage company and also to make their car HP payments in full and on time, irrespective as to how the unsecured obligations are being dealt with in the IVA. The IVA offer sets out in detail how much the unsecured creditors are to be paid and over what period of time.
Unsecured creditors in most cases receive settlement of only a portion of the money owed over the term of the IVA. The money they receive is called a dividend. For example if a quarter of the unsecured liabilities are to be paid back in the IVA, the dividend is said to be 25p in the £. The size of the dividend can vary. It really is dependent upon what the debtor is able to afford to pay and what the unsecured lenders are willing to consent to. Only some unsecured lenders exercise their right to vote when making a decision whether to accept or turn down a debtor’s IVA offer. Of the unsecured lenders who choose to vote, a minimum of 75% of them as measured in £’s, must consent to accept the IVA proposal before the IVA can come into being. Unsecured creditors who do not vote are still bound by the final decision of those that do. In practice the dividend will frequently fall in the region of 20p in the £ to 40p in the £, though of course it can sometimes be much below that range and at times higher, even up to 100p in the £. In a very few instances, unsecured creditors can actually receive 100p in the £ and indeed they may also be given statutory interest on top of that.
Whenever a borrower offers proposals for an IVA, unsecured creditors are not required to agree to the proposal. If they are convinced that the debtor can pay in excess of the amount offered in the beginning, then they can propose modifications to the IVA that will usually have the outcome of boosting the amount of the debtor’s monthly contributions or they can look to extend the time period of the IVA by an extra six months or more. The person in debt can of course decline to consent to such modifications and in that case the IVA proposal will usually be rejected. Occasionally, creditors may be amenable to moderating their demands for increased payments but that would be the exception and would only happen if they could be credibly persuaded that the person in debt cannot really afford the additional payments and that the proposed modifications would be likely to lead to the failure of the IVA during supervision and prior to completing the full term.
In the event that person in debt owns a mortgaged property, unsecured creditors do not forget that reality. They will check out the up-to-date market value of the property and the amount of money that the debtor currently owes to the mortgage supplier. The debtor is asked to provide a current, true and honest market valuation of the property and also a current mortgage redemption statement from their mortgage provider. Such a statement would indicate the total cost of paying off the mortgage, including any early redemption penalty that might be applicable. By using these two pieces of information, unsecured creditors can easily establish if there is any realisable equity in the property. When there is, the unsecured creditors can, by way of modification to the IVA proposal, call for the debtor to re-mortgage the property within the life of the IVA and to introduce some or even most of any released equity into the IVA for their benefit.
A properly designed IVA offer should already include a provision for re-mortgaging the property and promising equity to lenders. Yet, it could be that re-mortgaging is not an alternative for the borrower on the grounds that no mortgage provider will take them on due to their poor credit history or due to the ongoing contraction in the mortgage market due to the economic collapse. Even when the borrower could negotiate a re-mortgage, they may possibly be forced to pay premium mortgage rates.
When there is no equity in the debtor’s property, unsecured creditors will consider the amount of the monthly mortgage repayments. If they are too much, lenders might propose a modification to the IVA looking for the person in debt to dispose of the property and relocate to rental housing. The explanation is that the cost of rental accommodation would be significantly lower than the monthly mortgage costs and the debtor would be able to boost their contributions into the IVA by the sum of money saved each month. As a yardstick, mortgage payments that surpass 40% of net family earnings will ordinarily be deemed to be exorbitant.
In recent times, property values have dropped greatly, and many people discover that their property is in negative equity. This basically means that the cost of redemption of their mortgage is greater and sometimes substantially higher than the current market value of the property. If forced to sell, the shortfall due to the mortgage provider would become a further unsecured liability and so would rank for dividend with the other unsecured creditors, and as a consequence diminish the dividend in an IVA.
The debtor’s partner or spouse might have an equitable interest in the property. More often than not that interest is 50% of the equity. The debtor’s family could also have rights of residing in the property which might make a forced sale challenging for lenders, at the very least. In conclusion then, an IVA can certainly impact on the debtor’s mortgage but the good thing is that in most cases, debtors will not suffer a loss of their home in an IVA.
Whenever a debtor is looking at whether to choose an IVA and is nervous that it may affect their mortgage, they should initially confer with an Insolvency Practitioner, also called an IP, for advice. A reputable IP will look at all of the debtor’s personal circumstances and will advise him or her on all the possibilities available, without generally billing for this kind of initial advice. Solutions besides an IVA may possibly include petitioning for bankruptcy or if the borrower is not insolvent, entering into a Debt Management Plan (DMP) and there may be other choices available as well. The borrower can select the best option for themselves in the light of the guidance offered by the IP. When there is property such as the family residence involved, the borrower and their spouse or partner also need to look for impartial legal advice so that the legal rights of all parties are safeguarded.