Page 1 of 1
Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 11:47 pm
by Amandadon22
What will happen to PPI that has been paid to GT supervisor after our certificate of completion . This seems particularly relevant know the court has seen fit to support someone with their case. Iva completed means iva completed now surely!!
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 7:56 am
by Foggy
While an appeal is pending ( as it is) that ruling has no effect, nor will it change anything for those who have entered into any prior agreement relating to PPI which assigns the rights to the refunds to the IP in perpetuity.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 8:31 am
by lifenoteasy
I would say be grateful that you no longer have to deal with them - based on other posts you are well out of it.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 12:57 pm
by Michael Peoples
You must also bear in mind that the court case relates only to firms that operate the R3 standard terms and conditions. Win or lose this may not affect those firms using Protocol.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 1:25 pm
by Foggy
Nothing is certain, but I think the leap from it applying to R3 to applying to Protocol will be an easy one, relying on the spirit of the judgement.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 1:57 pm
by Michael Peoples
Personally I think it will be difficult. Under the R3 T&Cs effectively all assets not specifically excluded are deemed included whereas the Protocol is more defined in which assets are included. I could see this case going in favour of the IP but a subsequent challenge to Protocol could lead to a more favourable outcome for the debtor.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 5:59 pm
by Foggy
To carry on using that logic then, surely, PPI in a Protocol arrangement should not be an issue, as it was never included in the first place, unless an all assets clause was inserted.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:15 am
by Michael Peoples
That could be a reasonable view to take. It may be arguable under Protocol that any PPI during the arrangement was a windfall or after acquired asset so captured anyway but it is certainly grey. You could also argue that getting the clients to sign a deed of assignment is a reasonable request but where PPI is reclaimed post IVA without a DoA I can see that the debtor has a case.
If the debtor in the current case loses it will be interesting to see if a solicitor wants to have a go at the Protocol T&Cs. In my opinion they have a better case.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:36 am
by Foggy
It will be interesting to see what happens !
Personally, I had no interest in my PPI, having been "let off" far more in debt and interest, I was happy to have the refund go into the IVA and draw a line under the whole affair --- which is really the point: Drawing a line under the whole affair. Once the completion certificate has been issued, that should be that and PPI should be dealt with during the term of the arrangement or by assignment.
Of course, eventually the PPI problem will die natural death, but the legal premise that the completion certificate closes matters should survive.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:49 am
by Michael Peoples
I think that is the main thing that people are concerned about. They want their IVAs closed down and if there is PPI to be reclaimed or offset then let the creditors and the IP sort it out. However there are those who feel the PPI belongs to them even after having substantail amounts of their debts written off so there will always be someone trying to have a go.
There are of course solicitors out there happy to take on a case on a 'no win no fee' basis but if they lose a few and have costs awarded against them then this may also reduce or stop.