"if this asset could have been an asset of the arrangement had it belonged to or been vested in you at the start of the arrangement"
I've highlighted the above section of the After-Acquired assets clause contained in Mutley's proposal, and - whilst I am no lawyer - it strikes me that this wording allows unknown assets which existed at the time the IVA was entered into, to be grabbed into the IVA. So I would actually say this wording does give good grounds for any PPI claim to be paid into the IVA.
Would be interested to hear any other views on this from fellow professionals, and also Sarah's views as to how this is being interpreted within Freeman Jones right now.
