Payplan have recently changed my C.O. Since January i have had a letter every month threatening that my IVA will fail if i don't make an additional payment based on extra earnings from Overtime and Shift Allowance. This is an issue because i make the payments on the very day i get payed (24th) each month. These payments are made through Payplan plus website via debit card. My old C.O. was very good and obviously checked this every month to see i had made the payment. Averting the need to send a demand for extra payment. This has become very annoying as i have to get in touch with payplan every month to question it. I always send my wage slips on the day i recieve them via email. Also my new C.O. has changed the way my extra payments are worked out. Why is this?. They don't seem to be singing from the same Hymnn sheet. I have a payment to my trade union every month which obviously has gone onto my expenditure. But the new C.O. won't allow this. He says it's because the payment goes out at source from my wage slip. Thats ridiculous because whichever way i pay, it's still an expense going out of my wages. So we came to an arrangement where my basic take home pay is reduced by the amount of my trade union contributions. WHY?. What difference has it made?. He has just made things more complicated. Why does one case officer allow this and not another?.
I can understand why a deduction at source should not be used as an expense if the correct net figure is used but surely someone should have spotted this before now!
Unfortunately this is what happens when you use these firms which are funded by the banks and where case officers change all the time [I will not use Foggy's comparison].
Ring your IP and ask why you are being penalised for what seems to be their mistake but bear in mind that their job is to recover as much as they can for their paymasters so others please take note when considering IVAs.
If they using your net wage after the deduction of your union fees as your baseline then yes they are correct in that you can't then go on to apply your union fees as an expenditure (as it has already been taken into account) I apologise if I have misunderstood and that is not the case.
They were using it as a normal expenditure for the first 2 years of my IVA. Now the new C.O. has taken it off my expendture. So to compensate for that he deducted it off my net wage. I don't understand what the difference is?. It means i pay it all the same and it is taken into account within my IVA. Just that he has messed around with it for no reason and we get the same outcome in calclations. It just seems silly that he has complicated things un necessarily.
