I was really referring to the IP as a generic term in this example, Muggins, however I do concur that IPs should always be available if their clients need them.
savvasandreas – as others have said, they too did not believe they had been mis-sold, many did not even think they had a policy attached to their debt, but found many thousands of pounds worth of a mis-sold policy attached to their debt. Looking into PPI mis-selling may have altered what you believe is the best option. In any case, I hope it all works out for you.
Heretoday – I must disagree with you on several points.
Firstly, you claim “there has been little information provided by companies like ClearDebt”. This is nonsense. I’m quite sure everyone from this forum (due to their being 3 ClearDebt forum experts) is fully aware of ClearDebt’s stance on PPI mis-selling claims in IVAs along with every one of our clients. Each client has been sent a letter and an email. Our policy is also listed on our website and the administrators inform our clients over the phone. As far as I am concerned the communication from ClearDebt has been excellent.
That you disagree with our policy for whatever reason (and I note you haven’t contributed to the other thread since our policies and the reason for them have again been spelt out) does not mean that it has not been well communicated.
Secondly, your quote regarding a potential breach of your IVA is not sent in the initial letter as an opening gambit but after multiple conversations and correspondence back and forth so I’m not quite sure you have posted this post in the right context.
Finally, where you state “your former client is far from happy with you, so have the decency not to claim their post as a positive reply!”.
At no point do I claim savvasandreas is happy with ClearDebt. On a personal level I am pleased that savvasandreas has found a solution which makes him happy and I wish him all the best – as everybody surely does. Your post is so far off the mark that it borders on being offensive.
Can I respectfully suggest that the issue between ClearDebt and Heretoday is taken off line now. To argue so specifically about a point in one case, could cause confusion for other posters and as both parties have now referred the matter to their lawyers there ought to be a sensible solution to the issue being argued about soon. Once this specific issue has been resolved, then I am sure that both sides will want to share the outcome with all others who have followed the thread with interest.
Let us, please, either have full disclosure, what amounts to an independent review, or leave the matter lie --- then draw a line under this particular chapter?
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
Tom,Could you please answer a specific question regarding Cleardebts PPI investigations.I have asked David Mond this same question on a number of posts before,but never get a specific answer or indeed David has never answered my question at all.I have emailed Cleardebt directly with my question and never get a satisfactory answer.
Question:
Why do Cleardebt wait until their clients have paid their final payment or are just away from their final payment to drop the PPI bombshell.Why do you not let customers know this lets say 6 months before their final payment so this PPI can be sorted out & investigated long before their final payment as then their completion certificate will not be delayed.
This is the response i have received by email from Cleardebt which really does not answer my question:
ClearDebt have acted on this information as swiftly as possible, however, as you can appreciate there are a significant number of cases to be investigated so the Arrangements approaching completion are being prioritised.
I am sure that Tom will answer this from a ClearDebt perspective - but from a general IP perspective most of us are trying to deal with the PPI issue as speedily as possible. This issue was thrust upon the profession last year, and the firms with larger portfolios will undoubtedly take longer than others to get around to all cases - cases do need to be reviewed on an individual basis at the end of the day.
The process is not a quick one either - with claims that are referred to the Financial Ombudsman expected to take around 18 months to resolve.
It seems clear that IPs will be able to issue completion certificates once a client has fulfilled all of their duties and obligations, and regulatory guidance is likely to be issued on this soon which hopefully will alleviate the issues all of you out there are suffering from in wanting to move forward and put your debt problems behind you.
So how come then payplan have said you do not need to sign the forms and cc are still being issued? Why are there such different practises going on??
I would like to add that I feel both expert and IP from Cleardebt are now bordering on unprofessionalism! I do appreciate the frustrations from you both but you do need to rise above it! Please remember you are being paid a lot of money to do your job and this forum is bound to attract both positive and negative comments from your clients! I am a nurse and I would certainly not be able to argue with a service user on a forum such as this! To be passing comments such as the ones you are is wholly inappropriate! I am not condoning anyone for commenting on your company policies but sometimes that is what is going to happen on such a forum! Please remain professional as I now feel both Tom and David have seriously crossed the boundary!
There are different practices going on because IVAs are individual contracts and the terms will differ from firm to firm - even when the IVA Protocol is being used. Then firms will seek advice from differing lawyers and Counsel, and follow that advice thus ending up with a differing approach. Ours is not a "one size fits all" profession - thank goodness!
What is required is clear guidance from our regulatory bodies as to what are the duties of IPs dealing with PPI claims, what constitues an asset and what does not, and the effect of holding cases open whilst these matters are being explored. As a profession we, along with the respective trade associations and regulatory bodies are beginning to make some good progress on this, but as with all things legal and regulatory - Rome was not built in a day.
If that is the case Mel then you as a profession must accept that not all clients are going to be happy when differing practises are occurring! Therefore both David Mond and Tom O'Connor need to accept the disgruntlement which will occur and rise above it! As a professional myself I am truly astounded at the comments made by them both! It really is not acceptable I'm sorry to say!
I have sent an email to Andy asking that this thread be locked now so that Heretoday and Cleardebt can sort this out off forum with help from the professionals on here.
I agree with Niobe - this sort of 'heated' thread can be off-putting for people thinking of posting on this forum. We have seen this in the past and the best action is to lock the threads.
By all means if anyone has a question about PPI etc then start a new thread. However this one has, in my opinion, run on too long!
