font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by ginger323232
No the defaults will remain for six year (2013 + 2014) - regardless of the IVA the original accounts are in default due to not continuing with the original agreement. What they cant do do/should not do is add further defaults to the accounts after the 2010 IVA date, But your IVA will remain on file till 2014
Sorry to hijack this thread (and apologies for long post) but it is on the same topic and might help anyone else having similar issues with their credit files and the advice GT give them...
Ginger, would you think the following advice from GT was correct? I still don't, but can't get a response from them.
I checked my credit file after completion and sent this email to GT:
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>I recently completed my IVA and upon checking my credit file with Experian a few days ago, I noticed that although one of my accounts was agreed in 2006 for [amount 1], they are still updating the account on my file (last update was last month) and the amount has now risen to [amount 2 - 2x amount 1].
I was under the impression that as the creditor (Natwest) had agreed to be in the IVA in August 2006, the default amount would be frozen at that point and no charges would be added and it should be showing as 'satisfied' or at least 'partially satisfied. In fact, as 6 years has passed, I think it should be removed altogether. However it just shows as a delinquent account with almost double the agreed balance.
Can you advise please? I know I need to contact them to make them change the date of the default to the date of the IVA, however I'm not sure if you would deal with the fact that they haven't stopped the account as agreed and that they are claiming that the amount owed has risen.
So two issues, Natwest adding charges and the default dates being a few months later than the IVA start date.
I got a reply from Claire who said that the Natwest issue was something I would need to sort out with them myself (which is another story) but then surprised me by saying the following about the default dates.
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>I am writing to advise your creditors are within their rights to add Defaults to your file up to the point at which your IVA successfully completes.
While creditors have accepted the IVA, you are technically in default of the original credit agreements. Some creditors will not add additional defaults following the approval of an IVA but some creditors, this is a automated action.
I didn't think that sounded right, so having checked online, I replied with:
font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>
Hi Claire,
Thanks for the response. Sorry to be a pain about this but I've found several different forums commenting about cleaning up your credit following an IVA, for example:
"Another important thing to look out for is any adverse information after your IVA started. Ideally you should have a clean bill of health as any issues would have been registered with the CRA prior to the start of your IVA, but if they’re showing and you’ve got issues listed after your IVA started you should address these straight away.
Your IVA will show on your credit file for six years from the day it started. So if your IVA was five years long it will only be listed on your credit file for a further 12 months.The idea behind asking creditors to correct the dates on default notices is to make sure that these too will be gone within 12 months"
This implies that it is expected that creditors included in the arrangement will not add any default notices following the commencement of the IVA.
So, Clare explicitly states that
creditors can add default notices right up to completion, so in my case, I could have a default notice placed on my credit file in July 2012 for one of the accounts covered by the IVA, rather than the August 2006 start date. Um....ok.
I requested clarification as all the advice out there seems to contradict this. Of course I've had no response at all to follow up emails I sent on(10th December & 19th respectively).
It doesn't really matter how many times people stick up for GT on these forums - if they consistently give us misinformation and bad service, they are not doing their job properly. My advice would be ask them the question, then go away and check everything, at least twice!