The wording does give the IP the choice and he does have to maximise the return to creditors so perhaps a secured loan is the option chosen. Hopefully you can agree the way forward.
I dont think this is open to interpretation by the IP. Protocol was changed in 2014 to include secured loan so it seems to me that is was not included in earlier protocol. As the IVA is pre 2014 the new protocol cannot be applied as has been clarified above. Therefore the options are remortgage, introduction of monies from a friend or family or 12 further payments. I think happy buddah that it is not clear cut that you have to take a secured loan and you need to obtain clear evidence to show where it is stated that you do. I hope your IP does respond here as I am sure there are others who had no idea that this could happen to them.
Last edited by fubab on Sat Sep 13, 2014 7:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I rarely disagree with Michael, but, to me "third party" encompasses a firm offering a secured loan or even purchase a kidney. There is no question of imposing the new protocol retrospectively (which cannot be done). A third party is simply a party (company, individual, group) who is additional to the main parties to the contract.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
A complete change of opinion in just eight minutes[:0]
Look, if a proposal has no mention of secured loans as an equity release vehicle, then `third party` surely cannot have any inference to such.
You have stated on this forum thread that you yourself, a fully licensed and qualified IP, class funds from a `third party` as a friend or relative giving the funding, and not a secured loan.
If I were a debtor considering an IVA now, browsing this forum, I wouldn`t touch an IVA with a barge pole.
The vagueness of the proposal wording used and it`s interpretation come equity release time seems to have no limits, compared to the clear direct advice given during the `sales patter` of the initial phone consultation and proposal drafting stage, for some.
Last edited by Goosed on Sat Sep 13, 2014 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea".
Hold on!
First of all I am not an IP and my opinions are just that. I am an insolvency manager with almost 16 years experience but that does not make me an expert on contract law!
'My proposal did not have any variations included it states remortgage and in the event of refusal this is not deemed as a failure to comply so the IP has the option to choose a further 12 months contributions or an amount from a third party.'
I commented on the above paragraph which is different to most I have ever seen but it seems to give the IP the choice of what to do. This is nothing to do with protocol, third parties, remortgages or secured loans but as far as I can see the client has to do what the IP says.
McCambridge, Duffy proposals are very clear and everything is explained to our clients at the beginning to avoid vagueness. I am only trying to interpret the wording of creditors and IPs in proposals that are not ours but ultimately it may be better getting legal advice from a solicitor rather than taking any notice of what I think.
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by Michael Peoples
Hold on!
First of all I am not an IP and my opinions are just that. I am an insolvency manager with almost 16 years experience but that does not make me an expert on contract law!
'My proposal did not have any variations included it states remortgage and in the event of refusal this is not deemed as a failure to comply so the IP has the option to choose a further 12 months contributions or an amount from a third party.'
I commented on the above paragraph which is different to most I have ever seen but it seems to give the IP the choice of what to do. This is nothing to do with protocol, third parties, remortgages or secured loans but as far as I can see the client has to do what the IP says.
McCambridge, Duffy proposals are very clear and everything is explained to our clients at the beginning to avoid vagueness. I am only trying to interpret the wording of creditors and IPs in proposals that are not ours but ultimately it may be better getting legal advice from a solicitor rather than taking any notice of what I think.
I apologise for assuming you were an IP Michael, I just thought you were for some reason.
I can only commend you for the advice you have given, and continue to give completely voluntarily to debtors who chance upon this forum.
It just gets my back up when I see some of the shenanigans perpetrated by unscrupulous IP`s and insolvency companies upon their supposed `clients`.
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea".
I personally think there wasnt confusion on the wording but a new way to increase return has been thought up so protocol changed . I suppose one should look to what has been the normal practice with these clauses pre 2014. I had no discussions with my IP re secured loan and wonder about others who completed their IVA before this issue came up.. Seems to me that this approach is new and on that basis, only those entering into an IVA in 2014 are caught by the new protocol. I really do belive that independent legal advice should be sought because entering into a high interest secured loan, potentially for the same term as the mortgage could leave someone open to debt problems going forward and more importantly puts their home at risk.
Last edited by fubab on Sun Sep 14, 2014 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
Goosed. I don't think Michael has changed opinion -- It is ME who considers "third party" to encompass a firm offering a secured loan, if that is how the IP decides to interpret it. Whether I agree with it's use is another matter ... but I feel it is a woolly enough clause to allow the IP quite some room to manouvre, whilst not being the 2014 protocol clause.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
Hi Foggy, there is a need also to see what has been the norm - I.e how this clause has generally been interpreted in the past and this is what the court would look at when dealing with a contract dispute. Now dont get me wrong and think I am trying to encourage disputes, I was in an IVA, and have now come out the other side. Each must be guided by their IP but I faced some bully tactics towards the end which I didnt like so have taken steps to educate myself a little. A little knowledge can be dangerous so everything I say is my opinion and nothing more.
I agree Fubab. However, this mention of a third party introducing funds isn't, as far as I am aware, in common usage, so I doubt there is a norm. Putting myself in the shoes of an IP the interpretation would also rest on the amounts involved, which would then invoke the requirement to "comply with reasonable requests made by the IP".
What, then, is "reasonable" ? Say there is equity of £6000 and a 12 month extension would raise £5000 -- it might not be considered reasonable to require a third party injection of funds (possibly by way of a secured loan). However, if there is equity of £50,000 it might be considered a reasonable request in order to repatriate as much of the original debt as possible.
Again, the establishment of a "norm" is hampered by the myriad of other factors which must be considered, such as affordability of repayments and the term of the loan.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
well as of the 27th november 2014 i will be starting the first payment of a 12 month extension ! After 4 months of various attempts at raising equity and drawing blanks, common sense has prevailed and its been agreed that 12 months is the only solution. Really happy but a bit frazzled after all that worry that brought up old feelings. Don't get me wrong i know clear debt had to try all different avenues available before settling on the extension but i wish it wasn't so stressful for us in a iva after paying faithfully for five years. 12 months and counting !!
