Why does IP say I need remortgage- no equity

[lifenoteasy]

The key word is "attempt" - if you can demonstrate that you probably cannot then it is the other options that have been proposed.

Irrespective the critical thing is to complain - from what Foggy is saying you have no realistic chance of speaking to your IP unless you do complain.

[vlc1507]

Thanks lifenoteasy,
didnt want to attempt remortgage if its not necessary as it will be on our crecit file for nothing if Gt finally see sense abd agree with info on our proposals.

[vlc1507]

Morning All, Sorry to keep bothering you but I am at my wits end, recieved this today from the assistant manager at GT:

With regards to your query, I can confirm that as your arrangement is interlocking with your wife, your equity calculation is based on both shares amalgamated.

This is in line with the IVA Protocol on which your proposal was based. This is the case for all interlocking arrangements.

Whilst your proposals will refer to the singular, your Creditors will read your proposal in conjunction with that of your wife, they expect all assets to be amalgamated, hence why your monthly contributions are amalgamated in your proposal.

I understand that the wording of your proposal may be confusing as it refers to your 50% share but as previously stated, if we adopt that approach, you must also adopt it when looking at monthly contributions. With regards to your monthly contributions, your proposal states:
‘I will pay to the Supervisor contributions from my future earnings. The contributions will be in the sum of £448 per month, starting no later than one month from the approval of my proposal. Each subsequent amount will be paid monthly.’

Again, this refers to the singular, however, you and your wife have been making payments of £448 combined, not each. If we base your re-mortgage calculation on the singular, we must adopt this approach for everything.
I hope this answers you query?
As previously advised, in order to progress your case I must ask you to attempt a re-mortgage. If you are unable to obtain a re-mortgage you must provide 2 letters of rejection and your arrangement will be extended by 12 months, with you and your wife paying £448 per month between you.
If you are still not happy with this explanation, the only option here is to propose a variation to your Creditors and ask them to decide whether to accept funds paid to date or whether to extend for 12 months. Please not that this process can take up to three months to complete, which will delay the progress of your case further.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any further queries.

Please can anyone help? What to the experts think? Dont know where to go from this- any advice would be great, Thanks

[lifenoteasy]

Funds were amalgamated, debts cannot be unless they have made you both jointly liable for each other.

Additionally contributions are based proportionally on who earns what e.g. if your income is 20% higher than your wife's then your contribution is 60%, your wife's is 40%.

Based on the GT approach my wife and I would never have gone into an IVA jointly - we would have maintained 2 different ones with the increased admin complexions.

[vlc1507]

Thanks Lifenoteasy- None of the debts were joint, we both had debts which were put together. At no time have we been made aware that we are now liable for each others debts.

The contributions have been taken as a total available after expenditure, if this was not the case my wife does not earn enough to make her contution of £224.00.

Can we say that if this had been explained more clearly at the start (which it wasnt) we would have asked for single IVA's or is this all pointless and we just have to try and re-mortgage for the £9300?

[abbiesmum2003]

I also understood it to be £5000 equity each so we would in fact need at least £10000 given both of us in iva and both have the £5000 statement in our seperate proposals. sorry youre having such a hard time.

[vlc1507]

Hi abbiesmum2003, that is exactly as we understood it to be but as you can see from previous post this is seemingly not the case.
So frustrating at this late stage to be dealing with this when we have paid on time every month even when we struggled to find it due to illness but we just went without other things.

[Ike]

I have no advice to give but will be following your posts as we too are approaching month 54.
We also understood it to be £5000 each.
I hope you get manage to get it sorted.

[Foggy]

I am sure I have seen interlocking IVA's allowed £5k each -- hopefully a few will come forward and confirm this.

GT say the debts are referred to twice, but being paid off once, your payment is referred to twice, but only one payment being made .... so .... the de minimis amount is referred to twice and being added together ???? Hmmmm ....

[vlc1507]

So Foggy you can see the struggle we are having, seems goal posts are moving everytime we send an email.
It seems they are expecting us to fold by confusing us a bit more each time.
Don't know how much more we can push and so far not getting anywhere

[Adam Davies]

Hi

To me it is straight forward, each of you has a 50% share of any equity and if this is below the 5k mark then no equity or extension is required.

IVA = INDIVIDUAL voluntary arrangement

Regards

[Adam Davies]

Hi

From the 2010 protocol

9.3 If the amount of the debtor’s net worth net of remortgage costs in the home at the review date is under £5k, it is considered de minimis, and does not have to be released, and there would be no adjustment to the IVA term

Regards

[vlc1507]

Hi Andy, Thanks for your reply, I agree with you but Gt clearly dont and it seems I cannot make them see this.
I am left I think with no choice but to make a formal complaint but I still dont hold out much hope. As you can see from all the previous posts I have quoted lots of things from my paperwor but nothing is getting through to them.
Iva signed March 2010 but 1st payment April 2010 which I think makes it one inbetween protocols which in itself is confusing.

[Foggy]

I am glad I am not the only one thinking this way, Andy (getting a bit worried then !)

[another_bump]

This is an awful situation

Maybe you should widen your approach. You have 9k equity, and in GT eyes a 5k de-minimus.

We where faced with something similar caused by the house valuation. Re-address this by paying for a MRICS surveyor to value your house, pointing out all the issues that need fixing and that you need a quick sale.

On doing this we reduced the valuation by 28%. Looking at your figures you would only need to reduce it by approx 7% to get within the 5k de minimums. There is no way that GT can argue with a MRICS survey report and could be the best £200 you will spend.

I can understand you feel aggrieved, I did/am, but arguing with a faceless corporation who are just being b***** minded will grind you down.

Wish you the best in either fighting GT or changing the goalposts in your favour.