Personal Injury Claim

[LongWay]

That still does not answer the question of why it took you 6 months to decide I have to pay more than half (or clear the debts in full) with the money I received when I gave you a full breakdown of what the money was being used for.

FAIR?? Fair…..

I am mean reality check Freeman Jones, what do you really think we have lived on for the 2 years I have been out of work, because you as a company have our income and expenditure, you know that we cannot afford to pay the £200 a month that we HAVE been doing for the past few years, because we begged, borrowed and sold things to keep us a float. We used our gifted money from the wedding to pay our way and borrowed from family. (BTW the money from our wedding was suppose to have been paid in to the arrangement according to Freeman Jones, that disgusted me, I do not see gifted monies a “windfall” but you obviously do???? )

That all had to be put back, I had no job, no car and a disabled wife having to bring in the money. Do you know how that makes anyone feel?

So when I got the money, (and all Freeman Jones can do is go back to the very first phone call I made) I have had numerous and I mean NUMEROUS phone calls when Freeman Jones themselves confirmed that it is written in my statement that the monies I got was excluded from my arrangement. But 6 months on you want more than half...... I offered £13000 to start with, you said NO. I came here for advice and offered £7,000 your communication was poor and slow. So I complained and then after 6 months the payout gets "investigated". You made allegations without PROOF.

You stated this was not the same claim as the one in the original statement, because the date of me speaking with my Solicitor was after I first spoke to Freeman Jones. Well That was because National Accident Helpline had put me on to 2 other Solicitors before that who decided not to take on my case. However what I said was true, I intended and could possibly receive a payout from my employer in regards to my RSI injury, this is what happened, I got a payout!

Freeman Jones knows that after 6 months we do not have the money you want us to pay in to the arrangement. Who really would have that much if they were in our shoes? So who’s interest are you acting in really Freeman Jones, I mean after 6 months you say you want money that anyone would clearly not have. Had you done this when I informed you of the monies then although I would of questioned it, I would have had it.

We had rent, council tax and other bills to settle (borrowed funds) I was out of work and struggling due to my arm in finding a suitable job, so with the money I set up my own business. So I was hoping to have a future for me and my family. I was also without a car (because I had to sell that to make ends meet!!!!) so I purchased another.

When I first told you I had the payout, Freeman Jones then said I need to pay the full amount, I questioned this and you agreed with me that I did not, as I made an offer for £7000, you went away spoke to your IP and came back and said yes that is acceptable. Now you’re going back on that and asking for nearly £18000, how is this possibly acting in my best interest? Can you really answer that. (Sorry that was a mistake will not cut it, as this will be a VERY expensive mistake on my head!)

So I do not have those funds, I feel this needs to be investigated. If it turns out those funds do need to be introduced to the arrangement it will finish me. But rest assured Freeman Jones I will not sit down and forget this. That was the mistake my previous employer made thinking I would go away. If I feel I have been wronged I will take this to court and until I feel I have been listened to and given reasonable information. I will not go away.

I am in a worst state now mentally than I was before we started the IVA.

[LongWay]

Our disposable income stands at £60 a month btw. That was also before my wife had to cut her hours at work due to her disability!

With an impending major operation coming we really do not need this.

[Sarah Jolly]

Dear LongWay,

Thank you for the further post. Your supervising Insolvency Practitioner has written to you today setting out all the options that remain available to you to successfully conclude your IVA.

We have chosen to write to you as the letter contains personal and confidential information that we would not be willing to post on a public forum.

We hope that this will allow both parties to reach a successful resolution and move forward in this matter.

The letter was sent special Delivery so we hope that it will be with you tomorrow.

Thank you.

[Sarah Jolly]

Dear LongWay

We're sorry your letter missed the last post yesterday so it has been sent today. You should receive this tommorrow by Special Delivery.

We have also sent a copy of the letter by email to you.

Thank you

[LongWay]

I have received the email, still in shock that points are still not made or answered.

I see from other complaints about Freeman Jones communication in the company is very poor.

From the letter you sent again miscommunication....

I will respond to each point you raised when I have the time and will power to do so.

I will keep it public too, because I think people should know who they are dealing with when it comes to helping them out of situations and GUIDING them through something that is daunting to many.

[LongWay]

I think this one may end up in court, Freeman Jones are saying paying the £17670, or a breach notice will be put in to the arrangement, failure to rectify the breach would lead to a bankruptcy order.

Their fight is that because the sum was agreed out of court there is no breakdown of what the money is for.

They are saying that not all the funds are for personal injury.

My argument is that I claimed for a personal injury, won and got paid for a personal injury, my Solicitor agree's.

My counter argument is also the time it took Freeman Jones to come up and ask for the money, when they did first ask for full settlement, but then accepted and started a variation report for £7000. Now they say pay £17670 or we are in breach...honestly who would have that money over 6 months since getting it?! Specially a family with 2 children who have an expendable income of just £60 and paying £200 in to the arrangement!

Sadly business is not picking up either, something I guess is the downs of trying to start a business but that is my sole problem.

Freeman Jones communication has been more than poor, with a complaint about lack of communication being upheld once already (in regard to this fiasco)

Their letter also pointed out their disappointment of me coming to the forums to discuss this.

I would never recommend them to anyone. This has finished me.

[MelanieGiles]

Do the terms of your IVA provide for a bankruptcy application in the event that your IVA fails? This is actually quite unusual these days so do check the terms of the proposal.

Personally I would not air this dispute out in public, but I would arrange a private meeting with your IP personally to sort things out and for both sides to understand each other a little better. I am sure that Sarah would be happy to arrange a meeting for you as soon as possible in an attempt to draw a line under this matter, or at least accept some form of compromise.

If your IVA was presented in accordance with the IVA Protocol, it does give the Supervisor an element of discretion as to whether to insist on a windfall being paid into the IVA, so by working together you may begin to find a level at which both sides will agree to accept.

[LongWay]

I have written a very detailed and full reply.

What I don't understand is how when written in to an IVA arrangement that something is excluded can the supervisor then have an element of discretion to insist on it being paid.

I completely understand any other windfall would need to be paid, but this was specifically written in to my signed arrangement.

I will not go further in to this and will take your advice or not going public, but will let you know of the final outcome.

Thank you for the help Melanie.

[MelanieGiles]

If an asset is specifically excluded then there is no discretion on the part of the Supervisor to exert. Sorry - but I don't understand that point - are you saying that in your IVA the proceeds of your claim were specifically excluded? Can you reproduce the wording of that particular clause for us to comment upon?

[LongWay]

Yes it says in the statement that was sent to the creditors these exact words

"Due to Mr ****'s RSI there is a possibility that he will receive a payout from his employers for personal injuries, they would be excluded from the arrangement"

That was in the Payment Plan Details in Exceptional items. On the statement or proposal that was sent and accepted by the creditors. Signed by myself and my wife.

[MelanieGiles]

It seems, therefore, that it is the interpretation of the nature of the claim which was in dispute. Regardless of the settlement you eventually accepted, how much did you originally claim in total and how was this split between each head of claim?

[LongWay]

Nothing was ever claimed, as it was a settlement reached before court proceedings, the settlement was discussed between my barrister and the defense's barrister.

Or should I say I basically sent my complaint to the solicitor, I was not asked what I wanted nor was I told how much it could be worth, because my solicitor said if it goes to trial only the courts can decide.

It was only on the day of the hearing that I was spoken to about money, defense denied straight that the injury caused loss of earning but did accept partial breach of duty.

My solicitor and barrister did not think settlement would be reached, however defense offered a sum, lower than what I got, my barrister then counter offered a lot more than I got, but obviously they refused.

It was obvious defense did not want this to go to trial.

There is simply no breakdown of the claim the money was a payment for my personal injury, a payment to stop proceedings or I as I like to say a "shut up and go away" payment.

I know what Freeman Jones are saying, they are stating £19,000 is for loss of earnings, my Solicitor has stated there is no breakdown as it did no go to trial, he also told Freeman Jones that although settlement was agreed, Defense strongly denied loss of earnings.

However as I have stated to Freeman Jones many many times, I claimed for RSI, won and got paid for RSI. The Payment for RSI is excluded.

[LongWay]

These are the very words from my Solicitor

"I suggest you reply along the lines that a personal injury claim is a personal injury claim. It was run as a personal injury claim and settled as a personal injury claim. They were notified at the outset that you were making a personal injury claim, you did so, it was eventually successful"

[MelanieGiles]

If you got to the point of barristers being involved, surely there were some heads of claim relating to the case prepared by your solicitors?

I can see why your IP has the view they do - but only you and them can come to an agreement or not as the case may be. If you cannot find agreement, it would be relatively cheap for you to go to Court and seek directions in this matter.

[LongWay]

The heads of the claim?

By that you mean a breakdown of what the solicitor thinks each side is worth?

If so yes there where indeed guidelines they equated to over £58,000 maybe even more as it also included future loss of earnings, there are only guidelines the power had it gone to trial would be down to a judge to decide if and how much.

That was my solicitor's submission, how defenses submission had a blanket denial on loss of earnings but did accept partial breach, I know Freeman Jones are using my solicitors submission, but to take that in to the equation without it going to court and the judge deciding the defenses submission would also have to be looked at.

My point is, I received a payment for my arm, and the payment I received was for my RSI, I dont see it as loss of earnings are future earnings because the defense had a blanket denial on those points. However they knew it would be costly to go to court, and with their already admittance on the breach they also knew a chance to lose, so they made a payout.

I think Freeman Jones should of stipulated at the very start what exactly they where "excluding" because saying a payout means this has hit a very grey area, and a grey area that could prove very costly for me and my wife.

Also in their very words are "The claim did not go as expected" so now they want to change their minds?!