I must admit the thought of uplifts from the meeting scares me, I know that the amount suggested we pay is very much doable from our point of view but don't want it going any higher if can be helped.
I know this is all professional, but part of me wonders if people like this TIX have had greivances with some IPs before and so do things like this to be b***** minded.
I'd like to see them try and live the way they expect IVAers to.
Did you have to say how many miles you do in a week?
I would try and filter the extra £13 in the budget some where else.
Like another post said, the IP can adjust your payments by up to 15% without going back to the creditors.
Maybe you should shout abit louder at the CCCSva to fight your corner. We are with them and doing the budget there were times when i said that if i cannot have X amount for fuel, or shopping(food) then my budget aint gonna work.
I some times wonder if its a game of poker between you and the creditors? They are trying to squeeze you to the max and your just trying to get enough to live on!
Fuel and parking allowance was 173.00 a month. It may sound like a lot but it is what we spend.
We had to provide a breakdown of our typical monthly mileage, we really went into a lot of detail - it should be beyond question. That is why I was a bit miffed when they asked for our workplace postcode. I thought it was ridiculous as there is a shorter (but busier) route to work. Put it this way, between our home and the nearest city (where we both work) is the main exit for the city from the motorway. Always a bad sign.
I'll have to fight my corner as we cannot afford to pay any higher uplift than the already demanded 13 quid. It would be pointless entering an IVA as it will fail. I guess TIX don't really care, as long as they have that extra 'We'll get you a better return' bullet point on their promotional materials.
As Melanie has already said there is an impending VAT increase. Add to that all the fuel hikes and the dropping of Tax Credits I'm wondering if this really is the right way to go. It's really starting to feel doomed.
I wonder how amenable CCCSVA would be to a 15 percent adjustment at some point down the line.
Creditors meeting tomorrow!
Last edited by Imhotep on Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
Having spoke to a few firms in the last week it appears that the large volume providers (I have spoken to Blair Endersby, DFD, Freeman Jones, and Kingsgate) are increasingly getting more uplift requests from Tix, whilst when I have spoken to smaller firms they do not have any problems with Tix.
That will make interesting reading for anyone thinking of choosing an IP to represent them at the moment. I wonder why there is difference, as we rarely are asked for uplifts, but take great care to justify all areas of our clients expenditure on an individual basis.
All the main providers have stated that they have seen uplifts being requested even though expenditure is within guidelines, but with Tix having the majority vote on many cases it's very difficult to do anything about it. At Kingsgate about 15 cases were queries with Tix where all expenditure was fully verified and within guidelines but an increase was still asked for.
Whilst as you say, smaller providers are not getting any uplifts at all.
So what are they trying to do? Sneakily throw a spanner in the works from the outset? TiX represented around half of our creditors, as you say, very little to do in a scenario like this.
There were a heap of other variations as well. But they were from other creditors and were specific to fees and distribution of premiums (quarterly).
It all sounds odd. Especially if someone like CCCSVA (who write the guidelines) are having to tow the line.
Last edited by Imhotep on Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Well if I were one of the "main providers" I would be arranging to visit TiX to find out why this is happening. I try and meet them a couple of times a year, at director level, and find that this aids a good working relationship moving forward, and helps to iron out any misunderstandings.
I know Think Money, DFD, and Kingsgate have all met Martin Prigent in the last 3 months and discussed increases, minimum dividend modifications etc but were told that small increased should not be happening and there should be no minimum dividend mods. However, it does not seem to filter down to those actually voting on the proposals.
We rarely get uplifts unless there is something out of the ordinary in the I&E. And most of the time even then if we can justify it or give TiX a call it usually has the desired effect.
It is when creditors request an increase at the meeting of creditors, usually if they feel there is something in the I&E that could be reduced or was over the odds.
