For People Who's IP Service is Synergi

[coco]

I am currently with Synergi and having just ready yet another person has fallen victim to this company i feel that we owe to others to warn them as early as possible to stay away from them.

If we can all stand together and come up with a letter of complaint to the offical body then we can try and stop them for putting other vulnerable people through this painfull experience.

Please sign this topic and with hopefully the help of some of the experts we can file a complaint against them.

Enough is enough

51 payments to go
(I apologise for my keyboards poor spelling and grammar)
http://coco.blogs.iva.co.uk

[scaredkez]

coco i have already put a complaint in especially in regards to the lenght of time taken, so if others follow suit it will stand in good stead of them investigating their processes.
kerri

Please view my blog at: http://scaredkez.blogs.iva.co.uk/

[coco]

Hi Kerri,

How is the complaint going, i agree if enough of us to the same then we should be able to protect others.



51 payments to go
(I apologise for my keyboards poor spelling and grammar)
http://coco.blogs.iva.co.uk

[scaredkez]

still in early stages, unfortunately i cannot discuss it as one of the stipulations is i can't be seen to be discussing with any third parties so cannot elaborate too much only thing i can tell you is that they want specific dates and times and how the information was given so keep a dairy now of any contact with them, but i am sure if someone joins me in the complaint it will hold more light than me being one small fish in the pond.
kerri

Please view my blog at: http://scaredkez.blogs.iva.co.uk/

[ivamole]

It looks as though you will need to complain to two bodies if you want to complain directly to the professional bodies - it's the IPA for Chris Strickland and the ACCA for Tracey Potts. That's public information available from the Insolvency Service register.

It might also be worth complaining directly to the Insolvency Practitioners Unit of the Insolvency Service in Birmingham.

If they've taken money and are refusing to repay you should take legal advice (try CAB or look for a local solicitor who offers CLS funded free advice) but the ammunition you need to quote is that you believe that they are in breach of: (1) Insolvency Rule 5.33 which says that an IP can only take fees approved by creditors under the terms of the IVA and (2)Insolvency Rule 5.26(1)which says that assets are only handed over when a supervisor has been appointed by the creditors meeting.

If no supervisor is appointed - they are not entitled to fees. May sound tough but builders spend a fortune quoting for work that they don't get and it's up to insolvency practitioners to put forward IVA proposal that work. It's payment by results.

I don't know how else to help but I hope this is a start.

[MelanieGiles]

Good advice there ivamole (great blogs by the way!)- but nominee fees are pre-contractual and therefore not covered by the above rules.

If Synergie can claim that the monies they were collecting were in lieu of nominee's fees (instead of the usual - "first payments towards your creditors" I hear quite regularly) then these people may struggle to be heard. The terms of the engagement letters (if any) issed by the Synergie IP's ought to confirm the basis of the monies being paid over.

The regulators may well be prepared to revisit this point on a "best practice" and "advice" basis - interesting to see the ICAEW stance I reported on my blog yesterday, which is encouraging - and I think that the regulators are at last starting to switch on to the the mis-selling issues which continue to fester within our profession - and are largely the products of unregulated debt management providers.

Regards, Melanie Giles, Insolvency Practitioner for over 20 years.

For further details contact me at http://www.melaniegiles.com and view my IVA blog at: http://melaniegiles.blogs.iva.co.uk

[ivamole]

Melanie, I agree that it all depends on the original terms when Synergi were first instructed but if there is any ambiguity I suspect that, in the present climate where IVAs are coming under increasing scrutiny, the County Courts might be inclined to favour the debtors against an IP who has failed to provide what they were originally instructed to provide - an IVA.

I accept that nothing is certain but I'm suggesting that it's worth taking legal advice on the point - but the complaints to the IP's professional body are certainly worth following up.

Pleased that you liked the blog.

[coco]

Ok today i rang synergi as i had no feed back on my email sent to my IP complaining about the way my case has been handled. I spoke to a lady who is the boss of my administrator, asked her why my variation meeting had not been set up yet (suprise suprise she had my file on her desk). She told me that they where waiting for me to tell them i wanted to proceed with a variation meeting (dah) so i said i had i informed him to proceed 2 weeks ago and i have an email as proof, and that he told me he would base his figures on the caluculation that i worked out now should that not be their job shouldn't. (i did state this in the complaint that it only took me 1 afternoon in between working to complete the caluclations why should it take 2 weeks). Any i proceeded to tell her that because of the incompetance of her company i am now facing BR, i told her that the expenditure form had been made to look as though we could afford the IVA, she said why did i not complain or tell them that the expenditure was inaccurate I told i did that fuel cost where not correct it should have been and extra £80 per month, and the list goes on. (all my fault as i signed the forms granted but even so i was desperate and trusted this company was working for me and they knew what they were doing) I also told her that even her own people had said to me had my creditors meeting been 3 weeks earlier then my original proposal of 29p would have passed as NR had only just brought that rule in. she goes off on one asking who has said this etc my reply was that if you read my notes you will see who dealt with my case. I also complained that i had sort advice and the max it should take to get to a creditors meeting should be around the 12 week mark not flaming 6.5 months and due to this i have paid almost 4500 which i see that the only one to benifit from this is Synergi. With that i told even if my variation fails i will be taking this matter further as i felt you did not act in my best interest. My IVA should never have been put in place as it clearly shows that i do not have enough disposable income and that this should have been picked up in the beginging and the IVA should not have been agreed. And the excuse i was given also was that my IP is off sick and so was the adminstrator. I have to wait until monday for her to speak to my IP so i will let you know then

Please excuse the above i never did well as english in school.

51 payments to go
(I apologise for my keyboards poor spelling and grammar)
http://coco.blogs.iva.co.uk