This report says Lenders are still tough on Iva

[sonyse2t5]

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and ... id=62&ct=5

Most still rejecting?

[bagpuss]

i cant help but sit here and feel somewhat lucky that we did ours when we did.

So...is it the loan companies or the debt buying companies..? if debt can be sold for as little as 10p/£1.00 but then those who brought the debt wont except less than 40p/£1.00 on an IVA it doesnt make sence as to why the debt was sold in the first place.

Angie xx


My IVA Story......http://bagpuss.blogs.iva.co.uk/2007/09/ ... iva-story/

[whichwaynow]

Found this artical as well. Does this mean that there will be less IVA providers in the years to come ?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and ... _page_id=9

[Adam Davies]

Hi
Yes I certainly think that we will see less companies in the market.The fee capping will affect many and it makes me wonder what sort of service levels we are going to see in the larger companies as they try and cut costs in order to absorb the reduced income.
Companies with a healthy balance sheet and reserves will be able to compensate the reduced income by attracting more customers via advertising.I don,t think that it will have an adverse affect on Joe Public,what it will do is sort out the companies that do not present attractive IVAs and have a bad reputation/relationship with creditors.What we will hopefully be left with is quality providers that are equally interested in the IVA being accepted and it being concluded satisfactorly.
Regards

Andy Davie
IVA.co.uk Spokesperson

About me:
http://www.iva.co.uk/andy_davie_profile.asp

IVA Helpline: 0800 197 4838
http://www.iva.co.uk/iva_helpline.asp

[Maz]

I have just read these articles and I have just got my IVA 2 months ago. Barclays and MBNA were my biggest debt creditors. It looks like these banks are getting more choosy and strict in who they allow IVAs with. And it looks like the higher your income the more they would be in favor of an IVA. And as for the age thing I think that's discrimination!

[pixie]

Whilst I'm all in favour in reducing unrealistic proposals that are unlikely to last the full term, this would also restrict people's choice. Those on low disposable income would have no other choice than BR. Whilst this may well be in their better interest it may not be welcome. Everyone should have the option to pay back their creditors as much as they can and avoid BR.
I'm with a 'larger' company and the first contact with my ip was a letter sent with the proposal advising me that going BR and losing my job would mean I would be discharged in a year and not pay back a penny. This wasn't an option for me!
IVA's shouldn't be put out of reach to anyone willing to undertake one.

Pixie

[Adam Davies]

Hi
I agree,but there is no point in an IVA if it will not conclude satisfactorily.My main concern with the TIX fee proposal was that it would lead to low monthly payment IVA's being turned down due to the fee level being unviable for IPs.Hopefully IPs will submit the low proposals alondside the high ones,swings and roundabouts and I know that Melanie does this.
Regards

Andy Davie
IVA.co.uk Spokesperson

About me:
http://www.iva.co.uk/andy_davie_profile.asp

IVA Helpline: 0800 197 4838
http://www.iva.co.uk/iva_helpline.asp

[OPTIMIST12]

If lower level IVAs (in terms of total debt) become uneconomic to IVA providers and therefore basically unavailable to debtors - then surely the government will have to step in to ensure that the IVA legislation - in respect of "smaller" debts - does not fall by the wayside. Surely they will have to arrange for the OR - or some new body - to oversee and administer IVA proposals that would be uneconomic to IPs in the private sector? Or to employ IPs directly to do this (I think when I posted something similar before Melanie replied that they sometimes do this already). Otherwise what is the point of the Insolvency Act?

PS. I know that SIVAs are due at some stage but might they not be overtaken by events?

[Adam Davies]

Hi Optomist
When I talk of low level IVAs it is in terms of low monthly payments,not debt.The TIX compliant IVA states that the first four/five monthly payments go to the IP followed by 15% of the monthly payment over the remaining 55/56 months and this includes vat.So on a £200 a month IVA the fees would be about £1000 plus £1650 over the entire IVA period a total of £2650.This is a long way short of the average 7k in fees that have been charged.When you consider that a £400 a month IVA will return twice this for the same work you can see the problems.
You are correct in that the goverments insolvency services should step in if people are being denied the chance of repaying part of their debt because of IP fees.
Regards

Andy Davie
IVA.co.uk Spokesperson

About me:
http://www.iva.co.uk/andy_davie_profile.asp

IVA Helpline: 0800 197 4838
http://www.iva.co.uk/iva_helpline.asp

[pixie]

I can understand tix creditors wanting to reduce ip fees as it's them that will pay them. This would mean that a lot of viable iva's being rejected though. Even paying £400 a month the fees would be reduced therefore making only the real high level ones cost effective. This can't be in the debtor's or creditors best interests.
Is there anything currently in place via the insolvency service that can actually propose iva's for anyone not cost effective for private ip's?

Pixie

[OPTIMIST12]

Hi Andy -

Thanks for that. I worded it a bit badly - I was trying to say that IVAs where the total debt - or monthly payments - are "relatively" low are no less important to the debtor concerned than those where they are set much higher. And I would absolutely not blame IPs for refusing to act in a case where fee limits meant that they made no profit. None of us would work for zero pay. It just seems that the whole area of IVAs appears to be in for a bit of a bumpy ride in the future and I do hope that the authorities who introduced the option of IVAs will support them if the worst comes to the worst!!

[OPTIMIST12]

Hi pixie -

I agree - and noone can reasonably criticise creditors for pushing for a maximum return. I just really hope that an amicable agreement will be reached between the various parties so that the option of an IVA continues to be available.

[Adam Davies]

Hi
You are both right with your concerns.I think there will be a protocol announced soon by the BBA that will clearly define the creditors stance on IVAs.
Regards

Andy Davie
IVA.co.uk Spokesperson

About me:
http://www.iva.co.uk/andy_davie_profile.asp

IVA Helpline: 0800 197 4838
http://www.iva.co.uk/iva_helpline.asp

[jpj]

Surely the article means Ips are running round spending days doing up IVA proposals that are then rejected and the IPs arent getting a penny for their work...So surely that pushes up fees on the cases that do get the go ahead??

Glad I got mine done when I did!![^]

[Adam Davies]

Hi
The problem is that it is the creditors that dictate the fees not the IPs.This is why most IPs are declining to propose IVAs where NR have a majority vote,the IP doesn't want to waste time proposing an IVA when there is a strong chance that it will be rejected and they will get nothing for their troubles.
Regards

Andy Davie
IVA.co.uk Spokesperson

About me:
http://www.iva.co.uk/andy_davie_profile.asp

IVA Helpline: 0800 197 4838
http://www.iva.co.uk/iva_helpline.asp