Greedfighter - the way that you have described it, that is precisely what it does mean. It is simply left open-ended for the creditors to do as they see fit. Payplan seem very keen to insert this clause wherever they can about Supervisors withdrawing from arrangements and said arrangements thus failing in consequence. This for sure requires some clarification. It is not in my original Chairman's Report. I was only apprised of it about a week or so ago when it came cheerfully tucked away in my Equity variation proposal. Payplan told me that I had not been told of it at any earlier point because it had not been 'operative' - i.e. it's on a need to know basis and you only get to know if and when you need a variation meeting about the Equity. S'cuse me??? Need to know indeed - right from the outset that should be, so that we can all make properly informed decisions!!!! The arguments that have been put to me about this entire issue have got more holes in them than the Bismarck.
Last edited by brokebryn on Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Last monthly payment made 3 June 2013 after 6 long years. CC issued 21 August 2013, but, er, lost in the post. Finally got it 17 September.
This is an appaling state of affairs.... I can only imagine the stress that you must be under right now. Surely this can't go on, and I really do hope that Nick can sort this for you. Brokebryn my earlier reference to you fighting your corner, was only made when it sounded from your post that you were washing your hands of the company,(I quote "I've no wish to speak to anyone from Payplan"). It was not meant to imply that you could not fight for yourself. I believe that this is a major issue that Payplan need to sort out across the board and not just for yourself.
Understood Kaykay - you know how you get when for a fleeting moment you just can't seem to be bothered any more, but you soon rally round and get on with it! Hence, I suppose,the length of this thread and the number of views it has got! Thanks for your support.
Last edited by brokebryn on Fri Feb 17, 2012 7:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Last monthly payment made 3 June 2013 after 6 long years. CC issued 21 August 2013, but, er, lost in the post. Finally got it 17 September.
I am not going to get too paranoid about it. It may simply be that I had no equity in the property at the start of the IVA and creditors did not feel therefore that they had the opportunity to consider this, but want to reconsider it before the end. It would not necessarily be unfair or unreasonable if this is the case and they want me to extend say 12 months. I am not suggesting there is anything underhand going on but the 'wording'leaves the whole thing open to ambiguity and uncertainty. I am more concerned about this now because I feel that after 4 years there has been a significant change in their general attitude away from assisting me through the process to one of failing my IVA. I will not say any more since I have not yet had an answer having forwarded it as a concern to them and it may well just be down to my 'interpretation and perception'.
I don't personally see what kind of interest Payplan would have or what advantage they would derive from failing your IVA, so mebbe you are right and it is your 'interpretation and perception'. There was a thread on here not long ago about the attitude of Payplan becoming generally less welcoming and helpful, though I personally cannot claim to have experienced anything like that, apart of course from the issue that has generated this thread, but we await an explanation of that and its related offshoots.
You might find this interesting if you have not seen it / contributed to it:
There certainly seems to be some strange clauses inserted into proposals which is rightly causing concern to Payplan clients. I think Payplan need to come on and explain their side and why this is being done. Payplan are one of the IP firms that banks try to force people to go to so we need to know if these clauses were insisted upon by the banks who promote Payplan or are they Payplan's own.
Not wishing to hijack the thread, I don't particularly want Nick to look in to my problems I am quite happy to wait for an answer from my own case officer and IP. I was just commenting to indicate brokebryns concern was not an isolated one.
Well, no comeback from PayPlan as of yet. Perhaps this has raised some significant issues with them. I and others seeking clarification will just have to spend a little more time mulling it over, but I am sure that Nick Payne will get back to us when he can.
Last edited by brokebryn on Fri Feb 17, 2012 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Last monthly payment made 3 June 2013 after 6 long years. CC issued 21 August 2013, but, er, lost in the post. Finally got it 17 September.
I'm sure he will - he's usually very good at sorting things out.
Sharing from experiences of dealing with debt
The greatness of a man is not in how much wealth he acquires, but in his integrity and his ability to affect those around him positively.
Bob Marley. http://kallis3.blogs.iva.co.uk
Greedfighter I have found exactly the same thing with Payplan. they were great but this last few months I have had shirty correspondence and just a general change in attitude.
I also had this problem with Payplan and was so concerned about the equity clause that I asked for a variation meeting to be called - this was two years into my IVA as on reading the Chairmans original report I realised that the 12 month clause in lieu of equity was not included.
I asked on numerous occasions - what will happen if I can't release the equity? and was told that we would cross that bridge in month 54! I could just tell that in month 54 we or should I say I, was going to have major problems so decided to tackle it early.
The variation was passed and now states that 'If the Debtor is unable to remortgage her property the debtor be permitted to extend for a further 12 months at XXX per month in view of the equity in her property'.
Strangely enough though I have just had another look at the original paperwork and there is a clause that states 'The Supervisor will make provision for the costs of bankruptcy by purchasing a bond that in the event that the creditors should express their intent that the Debtor be made bankrupt will provide £1500 to be paid into the arrangement to cover the cost of filing. The Supervisor will not petition for the debtors bankruptcy without first seeking the views of the three creditors with the highest level of debt owed'.
What on earth is that about?! Now I'm worried again... where did I put that bottle of wine?!
