Problem is Michael that it scares people to death! I was just angry and no way was I going to accept this. Took a phone call to my case officer and it was removed straight away.
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
I understand your frustration but at the time you entered the proposal you would have accepted the terms that if sufficient assets became available in the future to pay all your creditors off then you would pay interest at the statutory rate. I appreciate that at the time most debtors don't expect this to become a reality so it seems like an academic point and only becomes a sore subject when it actually happens! From the creditors viewpoint they have had to wait for years to get back their debt and are entitled to interest, which you must have agreed to. Having said all that I disagree that your IP estimates it could take until December to hold the variation meeting and would suggest you make a written complaint against this estimated timescale. If you didn't pass the full amount of money over in accordance with your IVA you could be in breach of your IVA and Bankruptcy could ensure so they are technically right but perhaps they way they have gone about telling you is not quite right!
I had sufficient assets but did not want the bankruptcy clause for obvious reasons and when I asked them remove it, they did.
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
Hi Kallis - I'm not quite sure what you mean? If an IVA is breached creditors have the right to pursue their debt/the balance of their debt, which could mean Bankruptcy, regardless of whether the Supervisor actually petitions for it a creditor still can.
I wasn't in breach but made a full and final offer. One of the things in the variation was that if it failed they could make me bankrupt. I was not going to accept that as I did not want to lose my house.
They removed the clause.
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
I appreciate that but I was never going to be in breach - if the offer hadn't have been accepted then I would have carried on.
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
The issue is that some companies are adding in the BR clause when a f&f offer is being made.
Basically they are seeming to suggest that you risk breaching by doing this or that a creditor will decide that the IVA no longer meets their needs.
IVA started March 2011, Completed March 2016 and certificate issued 11 days after final payment. It was not always easy but then some of the best decisions aren't.
I don't see how they can. The point is that if the variation is accepted then it stands and as long as the terms are met as promised by the debtor the IVA will be successfully concluded. If the variation is rejected the proposal simply continues as normal.
Yes, Lisa ..... UNLESS the IP puts in a totally superfluous paragraph threatening bankruptcy --- the only purpose of which is to bully the client out of making the variation request!
For some reason I cannot fathom ( as most F&F offers do "make up" the expected dividend ) a couple of the "big boys" have decided that variations are to be avoided at all costs. They achieve this by bullying and frightening the client or, in some cases, simply refusing to put an offer forward.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
It's not whether they can - they are and its been a theme for a while.
I think that it is more a risk adverse process designed to protect the IVA company but as you can see it increases on the pressure on the person asking for a f&f to be offered.
I totally accept that not all IVA companies do this.
IVA started March 2011, Completed March 2016 and certificate issued 11 days after final payment. It was not always easy but then some of the best decisions aren't.
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by Foggy
Yes, Lisa ..... UNLESS the IP puts in a totally superfluous paragraph threatening bankruptcy --- the only purpose of which is to bully the client out of making the variation request!
For some reason I cannot fathom ( as most F&F offers do "make up" the expected dividend ) a couple of the "big boys" have decided that variations are to be avoided at all costs. They achieve this by bullying and frightening the client or, in some cases, simply refusing to put an offer forward.
Thanks Foggy - on what basis is the Bankruptcy threatened then - for simply proposing a variation?
It appears, though I have never seen an actual variation proposal, that some firms have taken to wording a variation with three possible outcomes: 1) Accept the variation. 2) Refuse the variation and 3) Request the IP petitions for bankruptcy.
Naturally it is their duty to point out the pitfalls to the client before proposing such a variation, the terms of which THEY have engineered.
Call me lazy -- but, were I drafting my own variation it would only have two options: 1) Accept or 2) Refuse and the arrangement will continue as previously agreed. I would not want to be leading any bull into any china shop!
Of course, subject to the actual circumstances, there are times when BR might be an option, but only use it when required.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
This does seem strange as on what basis would they be issuing a Bankruptcy petition? I can understand if the debtor has breached his proposals but if it's a F&F variation and there have been no breaches I cant see why Bankruptcy option would be warranted at all!
