You say IPs are not empowered to make claims however I thought that IPs have the "Power to direct debtor" in the event that the supervisor in unable or its not practical to do any act himself the supervisor has the power to direct the debtor to do that act, and if PPI is an assett of the arrangement then surely the supervisor should be directing the debtor to do all that is possible to collect that assett for the benefit of the creditors, Im just wondering that if the debtor failed to co-operate would that be a breach at all
It seems to me that these PPI claims being put forward by IP's asking debtors to claim, have moved far beyond the 'were you missold PPI' it seems like it is expected you make a claim and potentially commit fraud by saying they were mis-sold just to satisfy the IP and ultimatly the creditors.
If life is what you make it, I must have been in a strange mood when I made mine
I think it's moved on from being 'if you were missold' to 'you were missold' full stop Peejayel, I think it is becoming generally accepted now that PPI as a product was not fit for purpose so it's difficult to argue that you weren't missold, maybe you were fully aware of what the product was prior to signing up but that doesn't get away from the fact the product was useless anyway. I think this is why the banks have set billions aside to automatically refund without question.
This PPI issue is becoming a minefield, especially if you are coming to the end of your arrangement and are hoping for closure.
My personal view is that if you have been in an IVA or are in an IVA then you wouldn't expect to benefit directly from any claim [unless you have repaid 100p in the £1] and should co-operate where you can.
My only issue is that people should not be stopped from closing one chapter of their life and moving on at the expected time, i;e five years or possibly six years if there is property involved. There is nothing worse than goalposts being moved and everyone dealing with IVAs should work in such a way that completion dates are not affected, afterall the PPI claims have been kicking around for years, it just seems that in the last 3-6 months it has become something of a norm for anyone in an IVA to have to start claiming.
To Daniel - the only power an IP has under an IVA is to supervise the arrangement, collect and distribute monies and fail the arrangement if our clients fail to co-operated - unless there are express powers built in to the arrangement giving a wider ambit.
Our clients are under a duty to maximise the return for their creditors - ie the people who have allowed them to write off a portion of those debts. The IP has no actual power to make the reclaim themselves, and cannot compel their clients to do so either, although the IVA risks failure if they are deemed to be un-cooperative. It will be interesting to see creditor attitude, if a case is deemed to have failed on this point as to whether they want the person bankrupted. I consider this to be unlikely, but we won't know until it is tested.
Melanie, I think there's already been one post where the customer was threatened with bankruptcy and I guess for most people just the threat is enough.
IPs should not be threatening clients with bankruptcy - this is down to creditors to decide on and not us! We need to remember our roles, duties and responsibilities to our clients and the creditors, and stick within those remits.
Bankruptcy is always an option if an IVA case has failed due to non-cooperation of a client, but it is rarely exercised by creditors (apart from HMRC). Generally creditors would rather have their former customers back into the marketplace, where they can pursue them directly for the debts due - in which case the person effected may well choose bankruptcy as a route to get away from unfair collection pressure.
I am really failing to see why people are struggling to come to terms with the fact that they signed up to maximise returns and should surrender assets (including PPI). Or feel they are entitled to reclaim money from creditors who have written off a large amount of debt!
Yes I agree Bol, if I was a creditor, I would be quite keen to see a debtor realise their assets including PPI for the benefit of myself and other creditors
broke of london that's because when you signed up for an IVA you already pay a handsome fee to the IP to maximise it's return, not for them to go pot dipping into creditors money. If you like for once I'm sticking up for the creditors...duhhh how did that happen!
Is there reason for the IP not to wholly encourage their clients to self claim (where PPI has been misold), to ensure that the creditors get the maximum benifit, not some free for all. And to be fair it's the sage advice of the FSA and in the true spirit of an IVA is it not?
An then of course that begs the question of the lump sum payouts at 55 on a pension (if you were in an IVA) asset or not, becuase the indvidual can choose to take it later at 65 for example?
