hello there i made my last payment in august 2011 and phoned them b4 my last payment was due to see if i had any outstanding things to do b4 close sure off my case which they said there was none
Now 5 months down the line they send me a letter saying i have to re mortgage to get the equity from my house to pay them is this right as i cant get a re mortgage as i have bad credit lol
and would that not put me back in more debt thanks folks for any help in this matter
i am with grant thornton btw cheers phil
If you had an equity clause in your agreement, you should have attempted to re-mortgage during year 5. Failure to re-mortgage usually results in paying for a further 12 months in lieu of the equity. You need to check your proposal as it is your responsibility to fulfil these obligations, however I would have expected your company should have guided you through this process.
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 thanks for the reply's the only thing i can find in my contract are
this one says i propose to exclude the property from the iva however i shall obtain a professional valuation in the 4th year and release 75% off the equity
and then my duration clause says arrangement should last 60 months
the duration may extend at the supervisors discretion in order to complete any final administration but creditors must receive final dividend payment within 63 months of approval unless there are payments in lieu of equity still to be introduced for avoidance off doubt the arrangement shall not last longer than 72 months
this was with blair and endersby terms i never signed grant thorntons as i only had 2 payments left
You need to question GT about this clause for their interpretation. It does not make sense to propose to exclude the property yet release 75% of the equity. We were only able to exclude our property from the agreement, once it had been confirmed that we were unable to re-mortgage. Your clause regarding your property is very ambiguous and open to forcing you to re-mortgage or extend. In reality the cheaper option, generally, is to extend for the 12 months.
Last edited by KAYKAY on Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
You do need to sort this out as it sounds as though something has gone horribly wrong somewhere.
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
so do i kalis i shall just say also nobody from either company got in touch with us about the remortgage in month 54 to be honest i never even looked at my contract until they sent me the letter in january 2012 it was just stored away gathering dust
cheers phil
Last edited by phil254 on Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hi Phil, it sounds as if your case slipped between the cracks so to speak. Despite the confusing way of wording, it does look as if you have an equity clause that needs to be fulfilled. Speak to Grant Thornton as soon as possible to claitfy where you go from here x
Must say, I wish had been able to forget about mine. I was so aware of my obligation to re-mortgage post year 4, the thought of adding 34k to my mortgage had been weighing me down. It bothered me so much that I contacted DFD on entering year 5 to ask how I went about it. I was due to remortgage for equity of £34k and ended up with a 12 month extension costing me just over £10k so worked well in my favour in the end.
Yet more confusion and alarm about the Equity clause! The 'industry' needs to address this as a whole. It is such an important part of the IVA process (IVAs are partially designed in order to protect the family home and prevent break ups and all the personal and social dislocation that follows) that there really should be a standard line with standard wording in all IVAs. I thought that the IVA Protocol was supposed to introduce some standardisation (although my IVA pre-dates the Protocol). Is that not the case with the Equity clause? There are so many people on here having different and uniformly bad experiences in this area.
Last monthly payment made 3 June 2013 after 6 long years. CC issued 21 August 2013, but, er, lost in the post. Finally got it 17 September.
Brokebryn - it looks in this case as if the problem isn't the equity clause itself. It seems the equity should have been addressed just as BE were handing cases over to GT and both the IP firms forgot to bring it into play. That said, Phil also forgot to mention it to his IPs.
True enough, but whatever the cause of this or any other particular problem, I still think that there should be some standardisation in view of the importance of the matter.
Last edited by brokebryn on Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Last monthly payment made 3 June 2013 after 6 long years. CC issued 21 August 2013, but, er, lost in the post. Finally got it 17 September.
