If I was still waiting for a completion certificate I'd be quite narked if I am honest.
Give me a piece of paper to sign to waive my rights to claim PPI in future and I'd gladly sign that to get the completion certificate. Is that not a option?
BTW I was never sold PPI so cannot ever claim to have been missold it, if I am at some point required to make such a claim based on misselling then surely that's fraud.
I did drag out my old scanned copy of my proposal to see if it mentioned "Continued Trust" it did not as far as I can see. Though there was something in the Standard IVA Conditions by the Association of Business Recovery Professionals dated in November 2004 (Version 2) which I believe am bound to as well.
We're willing to wipe the slate clean, give you a fresh start. All that we're asking in return is your cooperation.
If that is the case Mel then nobody shud be threatened with the possibility of being petitioned for bankruptcy! That could be construed as intimidation and harassment!
But how would you know that a client would continue to co-operate Jamie, if the certificate were to be issued. I admire your optimism in saying that most clients will continue to co-operate - have you ever worked in the insolvency profession practically?
It is not an option to waive rights to a claim, The Matrix, as this does not assist the IP in exercising his/her duty to realise assets - however if a client states that they do not believe any claims have been mis-sold then I think the task of the IP to prove this is difficult - Jamie can probably concur with this from his own experiences.
You possibly have a point Muggins - but in defence of IPs we work hard to get IVAs accepted for people who say they want to repay their creditors to the best of their ability, and perhaps get a little frustrated when occasionally this is not always demonstrated.
The threat of bankruptcy should always be used as a last resort, and by communicating with our clients, and explaining why there is a need operate in a certain manner, I generally find there is rarely the need to proceed down this route - but if I have to I will, and have.
Yes but interestingly if the debtor feels that they were not mis-sold ppi and therefore does not wish to pursue, who would pay the fees to take them to court? Plus what would happen should the IP's claim not be upheld!! I still feel that nobody should be threatened with bankruptcy in order to make them comply knowing that this course of action is highly unlikely!
The issue of when a client does not believe they were mis-sold PPI, but the IP insists they were - unusual as that may sound - is yet (so far as I know) untested in Court.
My own legal advice on this matter is that it is difficult, but not impossible, for an IP to make a claim for mis-sold PPI without their client's co-operation, however if the creditor rejects the claim, then the matter can only be referred to the Financial Ombudsman with the client's permission. If such a situation were to reach stalemate, the IP may well decide that it is in no-one's interest to pursue the matter, but this could require specific sanction from creditors. I just cannot see how a debtor can be made to agree to something that they don't agree to - unless I am missing something?
