T&C Mass Variation CF

[recovering]

Thanks Michael I haven't had the letter yet so had better wait until I do before kicking off!!

[abbiesmum2003]

I have received a reply from CF saying about being patient (before reporting i guess) and the matter is being investigated by their compliance department.
I stated i was looking to report SW to the IS about breach of her of professional code. Perhaps if enough of us write to CF and complain seperately, to CF and the IS it will be more powerful. I will post if/when I hear back from CF about this.

[Pap]

I got letter today, spouse didn't, neither of us had anything in March. We emailed them telling them we did not agree to any changes to the terms and conditions but it appears that has been totally ignored. On top of that we both got our completion certificates last month so not sure what would happen if we complained. Certainly don't want them coming at us for anything. Just when I had finally started to relax about the whole thing this arrives out of the blue. Bunch of morons.

[vito]

I had a feeling something like this would happen - CF are a sneaky bunch.

Spoke to them a short while ago and they said T&Cs were sent to everyone initially, they sent them out again (I never received a copy) those who didn't explicitly opt-out would be entered into the mass variation meeting etc. I wasn't aware we had to opt-out?

All of my creditors agree to the hike in fees! CF put forward a proposal that I should get to keep 50% of PPI which was declined at the meeting - not bothered as I don't have any PPI to claim.

To those who have possible PPI claims CF will be sending across details to a "claims management" company for investigation. Personal details will be passed onto to this third party however they are.

Apart from that no changes being made to my monthly amount - still stinks though.

[nrushton]

I have emailed Greg Balfour with regards to this issue and will post the response when received. I have copied below part of the email sent to them:

I was shocked yesterday morning to receive a letter from you stating that a variation meeting with my creditors had been held. It states in the letter that you “previously sent me notice of such meeting”; however, that was not the case. I received a letter from you on the 16th December 2014 explaining that you would “like” my creditors and I to agree to a variation of the original terms and conditions of my IVA, in this letter was the “Resolutions for Consideration” which I was asked to sign, date and return to you and once returned and received by you, you would then convene a meeting of the creditors. It clearly states at the bottom of this document, and I quote, “I confirm that I agree to have the above noted resolutions presented before my creditors” I did not sign and return this document to you nor did I agree to the proposed resolutions. I present the questions, why did you continue with a meeting without my agreement? Why did you not give me a formal 28 days notice of such meeting as required? And why am I now receiving the chairman’s report more than 3 months following such meeting? I have also been made aware, through the IVA forum, that a letter was sent stating that if "we" didn't opt out of the changes then the mass would go ahead with the variation meeting regardless of whether they agreed or not? I did not receive such letter and this certainly questions the professional conduct of this company and Susan Wriglesworth.

With regards to the variation meeting I feel I have no other choice but to further investigate this through the IPA.

Lets hope it's a positive response!

[recovering]

No letter for me again this morning! It is like waiting for credit card statements pre IVA [B)]

[NightOwl]

I too have received a letter notifying me of the variation meeting that I did not agree to. Also our Ltd company who is one of the creditors, was not invited to the meeting.

[grimswold]

Nightowl has had his letter. Mine has not arrived yet. Interestingly our Ltd is one of our creditors and was not informed of, or represented, at the meeting. I notice that all the other creditors are represented "by proxy".
Hopefully Sue never-there Wriglesworth will be getting another blasting by the regulators in the very near future.
Once my letter arrives I will be drafting a very nasty letter to CF and copying in the regulator AND the IP association.

[abbiesmum2003]

Love your ''Sue never there Wriglesworth' comment Grimswold! I said the same to my H yesterday! Im yet to see a letter thats actually signed by here instead of simply copied and copied again. It will soon be too faint to even see if they copy it ant more. mel used to read snd sign everything. I personally dont believe Sue is present at that company.
will be interesting to see what response you get from Greg, NRushton.
Interesting also that creditors were actually informed! Im very surprised theyve ALL to the hike in fees which effectively reduces even further their cut.
Its all very fishy. And then to not informus until 3 months later! I had review April/May time and nothing said.

[Stevob3181]

Ok so I too have been included in the MV by CF even though I have written correspondence from credit fix stating that they acknowledge my instructions NOT to be included.

I received the report dated 11 days after the date of my CC having concluded my IVA at the beginning of JUNE.

1/ CF have clearly breached my instructions for my IVA
2/ there is little recourse that CF can subject me to now my IVA is concluded and I'm in possession of my CC
3/ all PPI has been investigated
4/ The elusive SWrigglesworth has either at best been negligent in the handling of my previous IVA or at worst chosen to ignore my view / instructions regarding T&C's.

Should I lodge a formal complaint with the regulator? hardly falls under 'reasonable requests of an IP?

[mummyx2]

We recieved the same letter today. I am very confused as we did an f&f back in Feb and 2 weeks later had our CC so really don't understand why we were part of the MVM???
I will call Monday and let you know what they say.

[Cath]

I too have received the letter.

[Stevob3181]

Ok so I too have been included in the MV by CF even though I have written correspondence from credit fix stating that they acknowledge my instructions NOT to be included.

I received the report dated 11 days after the date of my CC having concluded my IVA at the beginning of JUNE.

1/ CF have clearly breached my instructions for my IVA
2/ there is little recourse that CF can subject me to now my IVA is concluded and I'm in possession of my CC
3/ all PPI has been investigated
4/ The elusive SWrigglesworth has either at best been negligent in the handling of my previous IVA or at worst chosen to ignore my view / instructions regarding T&C's.

Should I lodge a formal complaint with the regulator? hardly falls under 'reasonable requests of an IP?

[recovering]

The more who complain the better I'd say
They are probably banking on us not bothering

[grimswold]

There are a lot of questions - for example, the fact that there are "only a few" that have not received the Chairman's report? Now, call me stupid but it is a bit of a coincidence that none of us lot who complain here have received the reports. I would have thought that, if only a few had not received them, then at least most of the people on this site would have done. Don't be a plonker, Sue, you know damn well that most people/nobody was informed and had letters when they should have done.

I sincerely DO NOT believe this lie, and I am interested in what the reply to my letter asking why every creditor is represented by "proxy", why the Ltd company that we own that is also a creditor is not represented (and which would have said "no" - I know the company SHOULD be represented because it ended up having a deciding vote on the length of the IVA). I want to know why an IP can breach a contract: a contract is a contract so whatever SW might say, she has breached it and therefore does the IVA still even exist?

I note that she cannot even string together a coherent first sentence for the letter; if she cannot do that then how can she possibly be capable of monitoring all these IVAs? It's clear to me that she hasn't even read the letter let alone signed it. I'd expect someone with her education to notice a poorly constructed sentence. So I can only conclude that she lets everyone in the company have access to her e-signature and that she has no idea about what is actually going on.

I've found a fair few holes in her letter and I will be asking via every single complaint route available to me for her to honestly complete these gaps. I believe this letter? In the words of Jim Royle: "My a***"