I've just had gateway 2 finance ring to tell me they are offering a secured loan via clear debt ! I'm a bit worried now. I mentioned the fact of affordability and the fact that when my mortgage goes back to repayment next year I will have no surpless money and she said they have different rules on affordability so she can still offer a secured loan !!!
You absolutely must seek independent legal advice before agreeing to anything. You should not be put in position where affordability through mainstream lending would mean you could not take a loan but through sub prime means you can surely.
gateway2finance are a loan broker that work with a wide range of loan providers. According to their website they pay "A generous commission for all completed cases" that are received from their introducers.
An IVA company can only enforce the terms and conditions you agreed and sign up to in your personal proposal. I would therefore refuse to speak to any third party until your IVA company had clearly demonstrated to you the clauses they are relying on for this.
I will keep you guys updated but yesterday i achieved nothing as i couldn't get hold of anyone at clear debt for help the phones just kept ringing. Im left with the same feelings of dread and worry that i last had five years ago prior to the iva starting. Haven't slept properly for days now as things keep going over in my head like what if they insist on this secured loan and we stand our ground would they then fail the iva for non compliance !. i feel everything closing in on me like i did during the debt years.I really don't think its fair to put people through these feelings when you've put your trust in a company and signed a legal document to take away the problem of debt.
i hate feeling like this i thought those days had gone
I think that is the way we all feel when receiving letters saying do this or we will consider making you bankrupt. Most will go on and do as asked without complaint because they feel there is no option. Ppi is the same and as each IVA is individual it is important to check every one individually to check the terms. This hasnt happened with a blanket decision by the IP to apply the same rules to all. I am out of my IVA and now feel in a position to ask for answers which I will then consider and take further if I disagree. My journey may be over with regard to the IVA but I personally do not agree with some aspects of its management and with a completion certificate in my hand I am ready to seek clarification. It is a shame that I felt bullied into acceptance at the time but the answers were just not forthcoming at the time. Really keen to hear how you get on as this is something everyone needs to understand when entering into an IVA.
Last edited by fubab on Sat Sep 13, 2014 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This scenario of IP`s/insolvency companies trying to enforce secured loans as equity release tools that have never before been mentioned or proposed instead of implementing the advised, proposed, agreed and legally documented twelve month extension when clients have been unable to remortgage has been an ever more prevalent topic on the forum over the last two years or so now.
There have been at least a couple of forum posters who successfully fought off their IP`s attempts at railroading them into secured loans in such circumstances.
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea".
The 15% is undoubtedly a factor as many firms are barely breaking even. The fee cuts have been savage and PPI has helped keep some firms afloat and the remortgage proceeds have been factored in to many a firms cashflows. Now that the remortgages are not available firms are facing losses on cases so I can understand why they are looking at secured loans.
The fees on small cases can be as little as £2,000 over five years and the remortgage proceeds turn a lossmaking case into a viable one. Without equity release many firms will stop doing smaller IVAs and leave the clients at the mercy of their creditors and endless DMPs.
I realise that many, smaller, firms are suffering and cannot help but wonder at the fact that the larger firms, which are either funded by the banks, or benefit from automatic referrals from creditors themselves will be the victors in all of this. This will lead to the situation where debt relief solutions are all handled by creditor funded / supported organisations and sympathy / assistance for the debtor will go out of the window.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
Hi Michael. This isnt about keeping a firm afloat surely, it is in relation to whether the persons IVA is drawn up specifically with the relevant clause (s) which allow for a secured loan. I think if people were to check, that the majority are not and if so, any new prorocol or regs that deal with secured loans for new IVA's cannot be imposed on a pre existing IVA? When regs/protocol are changed, how does that affect someone already in their IVA? Can the terms be varied without agreement given that it is a court document?
Hi Fubab. No, the terms cannot be varied without agreement. IVA's are no longer court documents, however, they are legally binding contracts.
Now, this, it appears, doesn't stop some firms ( and I emphasise SOME) trying their hand and hoping the client rolls over. Unfortunately, the laws of evolution apply and those firms who actually stick to the rules will become the dinosaurs of the Insolvency Industry future, i.e. extinct!
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
You cannot change the terms and conditions but you can offer alternatives. There is also the fact that many proposals were modified by creditors and require a variation to extend. This could be refused if the client has the equity and affordability to release some but refuses to do so.
If there is an automatic extension then usually the client will be unaffected but where there is a meeting of creditors to be called all options should really be explored first.
My proposal did not have any variations included it states remortgage and in the event of refusal this is not deemed as a failiure to comply so the ip has the option to choose a further 12 months contributions or an amount from a third party. Not sure wether they deem third party as a loan company ? What do you think ?
