Bit of background. Been in an IVA since 2011. Proposal is exactly in line (word for word) with 2010 protocol and only modification regarding equity release in chairmans statement is that it happens in month 66 as opposed to month 54. (I'm the sole owner of my property)
So, the time came and I sent off my redemption statement and valuation.
Got an email the day after saying "Thank you for providing your,documents etc etc"..........based on the information provided we can confirm that your arrangement is to be extended by 12 monthly payments to compensate your creditors for you retaining your share of any equity in your property rather than paying a proportion of this to them by way of sale or re-mortgage.
This surprised me as it was saying neither the IVA would end at 72 months nor was it asking me to seek to remortgage. Having read many examples of the calculations on here and using the examples in annex 7 of the 2010 protocol I got it that there would be no need to extend for 12 months. (105,000 x 85% = 89,250. Minus mortgage of 90,495.40. Equals (1245.40)
I therefore queried this and asked for their calculations and got the following reply:
Dear..... Thank you for your email. Your calculations were done as follows;
House valuation. 105,000
Number of owners. 1
1st owner equity at 100%. 14,504.60
1st owner equity at 85%. 12,328.91
Total 85% LTV. -1245.40
Clients 85% LTV -1245.40
Current LTV borrowings. 86.2%
This showed that your current loan to value was over 85% so as per 1.7 of your equity clause as this was over 85% we would not ask you to look to remortgage to bring your current loan to value up to 85%. However as your interest in the property was 12,328.91 (over 5000) then 12 additional payments would be added to the in lieu of the equity.
There have been emails with various explanations going back and forth until Saturday when I said we were getting nowhere and would have to escalate matters. They acknowledged this and said a senior member of staff would be in touch. Tonight the team leader called and to be honest it got us nowhere, we are both still adamant that the other is wrong.
Edit. So I seem to be left with two choices. Carry on escalating or pay the additional 12 months. Prior to doing either any advice would be welcome.
PS. Sorry about the long post.
I can recommend someone if needed.
The crux of the dispute is the meaning of "85% my interest in the property"
I am adamant that it is the property value, they insist it is equity.
In one of the emails to them I quoted an exact example from annex 7 using my mortgage and valuation figures and asked them to do the same to show me how they got to their decision. This is the reply I got;
Property valuation 105,000
Outstanding mortgage. 90,000
85% of property value. 12,328.91
Less outstanding mortgage 90,000
In answer to your post Foggy I have quoted the exact examples in annex 7 both in emails and during the phone call. On all occasions I have been told that interest in my property means the equity which it clearly isn't.
Surely if there are examples to use in annex 7 of the protocol then how can it be misinterpreted?
I agree with you all that I should take it further (and I will) but I've now had communications with 2 levels of the company (Equity case officer & team manager) who are both adamant that I'm wrong. Do I go another 2 levels? 3? 4?
It just seems a totally unnecessary situation.
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: Imhotep and 3 guests
Ask the IVA Experts a QuestionSimply complete form and you will get an answer from our IVA Experts (multiple replies within an hour *)
* Any use of this forum is conditional on you having read and agreed to our terms and conditions.
* If you enter your phone number, Vincent Bond and Co Ltd will give you a courtesy call to ensure that your question has been answered.
* The question will be posted on our forum, we will email you the location