Once more we have had "threatening" phone calls off GT re PPI reclaim..
My wife was called tonight, firstly she was told that she had accepted the terms of the original "spotty letter" (if she had indeed accepted the terms of the spotty letter then why the call off GT - something which the caller found hard to answer) she has never accepted the terms of the letter. She was then told straight out that if she did not accept the terms of the letter then GT would never finalise the IVA (again this brings into question the callers original point that she had already agreed the variation)......
The original letter made it clear that it was not compulsory and that if you did not want to sign the letter then the IVA would continue under the original terms, so to say the IVA will never be finalised if the letter is not signed is a lie and we are getting completely hacked off with it.
Weeks ago we told them that PPI had already been claimed and it had been paid into the IVA without the deduction of any fees. I even received a letter to sign saying I would be making no further claims for PPI which was signed and returned.
The caller said that they had a duty to ensure that the our creditors got as much of their original debt back as possible, fair point, but all our debts have been sold on for a fraction of their face value to speculators who buy bulk debts so not sure why they keep referring to the original creditors as they are no longer involved with the IVA and I no longer have any debts with them.
Funnily enough one of these speculators have their portfolio managed by a company which is the result of a management buy out from GT so until recently GT managed a portfolio of IVA debts bought by speculators (my understanding is they received a fee for this work and packaged debts together which had a guaranteed level of return, as I say this is my understanding and if it is wrong would love to be corrected).
We spoke with the support team the other day about a missed payment from May!!! after much discussion they actually did find the payment and admitted their "system" did not have my details up to date!!!
Good old Gt bullying via thier PPI arm, never gets any better ring them and tell them in no uncertain terms they are harassing you and if they had bothered to check thier records they would realise there was nothing left to claim.
GT are the type of big brother company who make me fume when they bully to get more money.
I,ve got my completion without letting them do a spurilous PPI investigation or do a variation on the VAT fiasco.
They threatened time and time again i stood my ground and said no until they realised nothing was going to change.
Their "Opinion" then held no water and they had to close the IVA and issue the CC.
They bring shame to the rest of the industry.
Time to end of IVA 0 days
Time to end of GT dealing with it...CC recieved after a battle royal !!
Mel, I was specifically told by a GT employee that, if my variation was accepted, my certificate of completion would not be issued unless I agreed to the terms of yon spotty letter. The phone call was one I had made to find out how the variation had gone (which he was, at that time, unable to say)and the "You must sign the MVM letter speech" came out like a badly scripted commercial when I tried to end the call.
My opinions are merely that .. opinions based on experience. Always seek professional advice.
IVA Completed 23rd July 2013 .... C.C. 10th January 2014
Hi Mel, our understanding of the call was that if my wife did not accept the variation then they would not finalise the IVA - ever.... It was quite a high pressure call and my wife was of the understanding that the caller was well versed in "persuading" people to accept the variations over the phone.
The reference to creditors was on the basis that they (GT) had a duty to recoup as much money as possible, this does seem a bit of a catch 22 for the creditors as they have sold the debt on and if any further monies were paid into the pot then its only the speculators who benefit as they will get a return greater than that originally projected when they bought the debt and the original creditors will loose out even more...
The call ended with the caller saying that this would not be the end of the matter and to expect a further phone call.... Even though they are fully aware that it is a joint IVA and I have already signed and returned a letter saying I will not be making any further claims etc....
I may as well rant a bit more as I am on a roll......
When we originally got advised to go into the IVA we were in a position whereby we could have made a lump sum cash payment which would have been about 30 - 35% of the original debt. We were told this would not be accepted and an IVA was the only way forward.
30 months in all the debts were sold on, when I look at what we have paid, the fees deducted up to that point, and working on an average of say 25% of the face value purchase price of the debt left by the speculators I get a figure not far off what we could have originally paid...
The only beneficiary in going into the IVA can only be GT as they get 5 - 6 years of fees (over £18,000).........
Oh dear - I do hope the powers that be at GT are picking up on these threads and attempting to deal with the issues concerned. But regardless of this, the IP does have a duty to realise the assets correctly included in the IVA, but should not be using oppressive or inappropriate tactics to achieve this.
Not too sure why you were advised that a full and final IVA would not be accepted. What dividend did you eventually end up offering in your contributions based IVA - the intial one and not the one which is likely to be eventually achieved.
Hi Mel,
Our original proposal was for some 64p/£ but when we got the paperwork back from GT after the IVA meeting this had been increased to 84p/£.
Given the PPI that we have reclaimed and all the overtime my wife has put into the IVA (it was only after being on here that we realised that we could have kept some of her overtime so 100% of it has always been included within our I&E annual reviews) we are looking at achieving some 92p/£.
The ultimate return is not an issue as we owe the money, the point I was making was that the original creditors have ultimately accepted a far lower level of return to get a quick settlement of the debt and the level of return is the same as something we could have achieved from day one...
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by MelanieGiles
So that may be why they felt a 30-35% would not be acceptable to creditors?
True but given what they have now accepted it does make you wonder if they would have accepted that day one, if they were truly after a higher return then they would never have sold the debt on....
I have to say that I would find that doubtful nickjohn. If you could pay 64p by way of a contributions based IVA, it would be nigh impossible to get one accepted on the basis of a lump sum of 30 to 35p in the £
If a 64p/£ was a minimum contribution level then why accept a lower one, which is what they have now done even though our record of payments show we are on target for a higher return...
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by MelanieGiles
Sorry - I thought you were now predicting a return of 92p in the £? I must clearly be missing something.
No its me explaining things badly.
Original proposal return projected at 64p/£.
Return agreed at IVA meeting 84p/£.
Current on target return projected to be 92p/£.
Original creditors have sold their debts on for a return of circa 30 - 35p/£.
Surely if the original creditors had wanted to achieve the highest possible return they would not have sold mid way through they would have gone the full term of the IVA.
I think her indoors might have hit the nail on the head re why the initial offer of settlement was not made.
When we first looked at going into an IVA we had an agent from CCCS come and see us, he was the one who pushed for the IVA with GT and said an offer would not be accepted.
After the IVA was agreed we found out that he got a fee of £800......
I am only guessing but he probably would have got nothing if an initial settlement offer had been accepted...
