Page 1 of 2
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:43 pm
by WiseOwl
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:50 pm
by kallis3
Let's hope that it doesn't affect too many new clients.
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:08 pm
by Foggy
My thoughts are that it will simply make BR much more attractive to many and the creditors, including Link Financial will be the losers.
Many in an IVA would actually be better off going BR, those with no assets, no career concerns and it is those who were trying to repay the debt as best they could. They might well now, take the "stuff it" attitude and go BR anyway !
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:14 pm
by oscar
I'm not sure that what is being proposed by Link Financial will actually get full approval I hope it doesn't.
Oscar
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:53 pm
by WiseOwl
Unfortunately LINK don't need approval from anyone.
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:17 pm
by ginger3232
Wasnt this the company that went to court with MBNA - earlier in the year for harrassement /silent calls to a debtor - the debt was written off by the court due to harrassment.
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:46 pm
by oscar
I've had another read of your link and I see what you mean WiseOwl. I still just hope that the debt resolution forum or the Government can come up with something to attempt to either stop or clamp down on their tactics although I can see this may be unlikely, depends on the legal position so hopefully their own legal team will tell them NO. Best wishes
Oscar
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 6:45 pm
by TheMatrix
Foggy wrote:
My thoughts are that it will simply make BR much more attractive to many and the creditors, including Link Financial will be the losers.
Many in an IVA would actually be better off going BR, those with no assets, no career concerns and it is those who were trying to repay the debt as best they could. They might well now, take the "stuff it" attitude and go BR anyway !
Totally agree, only reason I took the IVA route was to keep it private, from others and my employer. This resulted in me having to compromise and pay 5 years instead of 3 as with a IPO.
Creditors as a result were much better off with me in a IVA with no property and no assets. They would have had very little from me if I had gone BR, and if this sort of thing had happened 5 years ago I would have seriously considered an alternative to the IVA and BR may well have been that option even if it meant losing my job and if that had happened they would have got nothing. [:p]
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 7:39 pm
by Adam Davies
Hi
Maybe the creditors who sell their debt to Link should insist that IVA protocol is carried on ?
Regards
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 7:56 pm
by kallis3
I hope so Andy.
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:01 pm
by Daniel Griffiths
What an interesting article, especially the proposal for nominee fees fixed at £750, I guess that means no more anomynous texts to my phone telling me that Government legislation can allow me to write off debt I cannot pay, the cost of the text would make it prohibitive cost wise to the provider. At least bankruptcy requires no approval of companies like Link Financial,
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:14 pm
by kallis3
Daniel - you know exactly how the insolvency service works so please don't patronise the rest of us on here.
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:27 pm
by Skippy
And as we all know BR is not the right solution for everyone. I'm sure anyone in danger of losing their home won't appreciate gloating comments about how BR is better.
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:39 pm
by kallis3
Quite agree Skippy!
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 10:25 pm
by TheMatrix
Daniel Griffiths wrote:
At least bankruptcy requires no approval of companies like Link Financial,
And no need for the middleman to take a cut by helping you to declare BR because you can do it all yourself too for a fraction of the cost if that's right for you.
Best to get all the options by speaking to a professional licensed Insolvency Practitioner about your options.