Recommended ? Debt Advice Trust

[Andrew Graveson]

Hi J-DOUBLEYA,

Interested to know why a debt-solutions organisation that receives many of it's referrals from the credit industry is best described as an underdog?

[J-DOUBLEYA]

Hi again both,

I appreciate your comments and reasonableness. I have looked at a number of posts on this forum and feel that CCCS seem to be 'on the ropes' in a number of areas. I cant help then voicing my opinion because the clients that I have helped via CCCS have all had a great experience. If I had cause to complain, believe me, I would.

Andrew - Everyone in this industry is paid by the Credit Industry so what does it matter who refers ? Are you honestly trying to say that if a major financial institution decided to refer its troubled clients to you for a financial MOT, you would refuse ? Further, if you did your best to offer a solution, would that make you in any way biased ? I dont think so ! but some people seem to think this mechanism they have is in some way a bad thing - the referrals that is. I dont think they are perfect or indeed 'the' voice but they have tried ,in my opinion, to get certain standards in place across the debt solution industry and for that i commend them. CABx for years have been trying to do something similar.

Mel -the guidelins you quote, according to my reference, are incorrect. Apparently there is a lower limit, an upper limit and a 'guideline' , (middle amount). Anywhere between the lower and upper is fine and either side will require the adviser to provide an appropriate reason why. My understanding is that a single person on the upper limit for food is allowed £186.00 & £28.00 for clothing plus some other money £31.00 for meals at work etc.
I have no problem with this because the client tells them how much they need not the other way around.

I must admit I love a good old debate and one of the reasons that I like this forum is because there is loads of support for people in debt. I have no issue with fee chargers or the fee free advice agy's but there seems to be an anti CCCS theme in here that i really must take issue with. Perhaps anti is the wrog word but i dont have the brain cells to find the right ones tonight - really tired..

forgot to add that I have been advising clients about this website where IVA's are an option but my hands are tied !! Mel - not another clue but if i said a chap called Brian Chicken {retired some time ago now ) provided me with a lasting impression of the positive IVA - would that ring any bells ?

[Adam Davies]

Hi
I think that it boils down to the fact that there have been questions raised about CCCs impartialality and their charity status.........it was discussed at the recent debt debate although no-one was willing to name the company.
Interesting that in a CCCS DMP the creditor will receive between 85-90% of the debt[after CCCs are paid] whilst in a fee paying DMP creditors will receive 100%,although Joe Publc will pay less under a CCCs DMP.
I can assure you that there is no anti CCCs stance on this forum,just questions to be answered
Regards

[MelanieGiles]

I am perfectly aware of the lower, guidelined and upper limits (I work with them every day of my professional life - a bit like I do with SIP 3!) - but I feel that you should obtain a copy of the actual document before commenting further. Andy can e-mail you a copy if you need one.

I would accept your comments if there were three levels known as minimum, "average", and maximum, but they call the median figure "guideline" - and let me assure you that the creditors who are using these figures are very much limiting clients to the "guideline" figures being the subject and quantum of my earlier post.

I am in no way anti-CCCS as an organisation. I have said before that I have referred many clients to them in the past, and will continue to do so if clients want to do DMPs and not pay professional fees. I respect their position in the marketplace, as I would hope they do mine.

I do take exception, however, to the strict allowances which may work for the CCCS, but which are harsh and can put people into severe difficulty over a number of years when they are trying to rehabilitate and live modest lives, when compared to the allowances the Official Receiver would make if they were to declare themselves bankrupt.

In the long run, the current stance taken by some creditors in using guidelined figures without even reading the IVA proposals - thereby taking no notice of the justification for increased expenditure, is going to result in heightened IVA failure in the long run - and I suppose that is something else that people will use to beat up IPs and IVAs generally.

Or maybe someone will just realise that the new protocol allows for the IP to reduce the payments at his own discretion by 15% without further penalty or extension of IVA term, in the event that the debtor struggles to make the payments. Now I wonder how many IPs will be exercising that right over the next few months very soon after the creditors meeting!!! Yes I am cynical sometimes, but what a farce this all is becoming.

And I agree about lively debate - it is such that makes this forum a welcoming place for sharing ideas, fears and moans, as well as positive thought. Good on you for standing up for what you feel is right - this is the UK after all. I will continue to do so as well.

[Andrew Graveson]

Hi JDOUBLEYA,

Good to have a debate on this subject. It seems to come up on a monthly basis and I think we can assume as such that it's important.

I am clear that I am not paid by the credit industry. Bright Oak is paid only by the clients that we represent.

This is not the case with fee-free DMP companies. Not many people that I know believe that free lunches are free and we take the same view.

I am also clear that good open and honest relations between Bright Oak and my client's creditors are vital to my client's best interests. It is clear that such good relationships with the credit industry are in the best interest of debtors, creditors, and debt management clients. In this way we are mutually interdependent.

Bright Oak may be mutually interdependent with the credit industry in the way described above, but we are in no way dependant upon it for the future of our business in terms of finding new clients. Our advice is provided without direction or restriction from the credit industry via referral or funding power. Will the fee-free sector come on this site and say the same? The invitation has been put out there many times and it hasn't happened.

I would accept referals from a creditor organisation only if we were free to provide what we consider to be best advice without consequence for our client or Bright Oak. Funnily enough that doesn't seem to happen in our industry.

We freely advance information about fee-free debt management to those who contact us. I've been on record on this website on multiple occasions saying that if....
1 - You get quality and prompt service.
2 - Your DMP company works hard to get interest and charges frozen.
3 - Your DMP company does not tolerate surcharges relating to your entrance to a DMP.
... then you're better off with a fee-free DMP provider.

Strangely enough this doesn't seem to happen very often either.

And that just about sums it up. Smoke and mirrors hidden behind charitable status. Myvesta have reported about the removal of charitable status of creditor funded DMP companies in the USA. This is because they became viewed as collection agents for creditors rather than charitable organisations acting for debtors.

The questions regarding this have also gone unanswered.

If I wanted representation on any kind of issue I'd want to be clear that my representatives acted for me.

Can you say with conscience to others that this is the case with UK fee-free DMP providers?

[OPTIMIST12]

Fascinating to read that there are "upper" and "lower" limits - or guidelines - for something as basic as the figure allowed for a single persons food / housekeeping.

Speaking as a single person who is allowed £140 per month for food / housekeeping I was just wondering how another single person could argue - or be assumed to need more - or less? We all need to eat and buy the other basics essential for life - but surely one single person needs the same amount as another to cover this. I know that in many other areas of I + E there will be wide variations according to the single persons circumstances but I would have thought that something as fundamental as food / housekeeping would be set in stone? We all have access to the same shops etc. - what would qualify a person for the "upper" limit?

I had always assumed that all of us "singles" were on the £140 per month - its amazing what you learn on this forum.

[johnt]

Hi JDOUBLEYA,

And that just about sums it up. Smoke and mirrors hidden behind charitable status. Myvesta have reported about the removal of charitable status of creditor funded DMP companies in the USA. This is because they became viewed as collection agents for creditors rather than charitable organisations acting for debtors.

well that is a thorn isn't it. I've generally advocated anyone should go to a charitable organisation first, especially since the CAB are inclined to offer the same advice.

I was fortunate, when I needed help with debt, I was already working in an industry that supported people with this sort of problem (online gambling, I know [:0] ) so consequently had a good heads up and knew an IVA was probably right for me. A DMP just wasn't practical, and too soul destroying to consider, and since I wanted to pay back as much of the debt as I practically could then bankruptcy wasn't an option either.

I know the solution is working for me at the moment, greater communication with my IP would be more reassuring, and not speaking to someone in an Indian call centre post IVA would help too.

With a potential avalanche of new claims appearing over the next eight months, I'm sure this issue is going to become an extremely hot topic. The question is how well the industry will adjust to a dramatically changing fiscal landscape.

[johnt]

Speaking as a single person who is allowed £140 per month for food / housekeeping I was just wondering how another single person could argue - or be assumed to need more - or less? We all need to eat and buy the other basics essential for life - but surely one single person needs the same amount as another to cover this. I know that in many other areas of I + E there will be wide variations according to the single persons circumstances but I would have thought that something as fundamental as food / housekeeping would be set in stone? We all have access to the same shops etc. - what would qualify a person for the "upper" limit?

Regional variation could have some impact I guess. I should think though, and relating to my last post, not all IP's are the same. Some smaller firms offer great advice, both prior and post IVA. Many don't, and there conditions vary.

It's an increasingly competitive market, and there are consequences because of this.

[size5]

I'm with Mel, it's pointless to set allowances that are too low.
My single days are long gone (and on Valentine's day I suppose I should say that that is a good thing!!) but I cannot possibly envisage surviving on less than £35 a week for food.

[Skippy]

Optimist, if someone has to have a special diet then they may well need more money than someone who can eat 'normal' food.

[OPTIMIST12]

Thats a good point Skippy. As someone who will eat most things and can happily live on "Value" brands (Thank You Tesco) I had not considered that some people have restricted diets.

It is certainly an advantage being able to eat most things - whatever is on special offer goes in my basket - except I cant stand fish!!!!

[aguise]

There are many reasons for increased money for food someone posted yesterday if there were any coeliacs on the forum, that is restrictive, diabetics etc, gluten intolerence. I think a loaf of wheat free bread is something like £3-4. We eat value stuff as well at times but meat is always lean and loads of fruit and veg, olive oil as hubby had heart attack so it adds up on shopping.

Ang

[buttercup]

I am a coeliac & gluten free food is very expensive.I am able to get basics on prescription but anything nice you have to buy. It can be a healthy diet as you can not eat much processed & packaged food most stuff I make from scratch. Just used my last bit of bread to make stuffing.

I did see some wafers like kit kats in co-op 5 for £2.99 & yes bread is £3-£4 per loaf.

[aguise]

Hi Buttercup make sure you allow for it in your I and E . They dont give that much via prescription do they. Its very difficult we have a friend with the same and its always hard at parties and buffets as she cant eat very much, and brings her own food sometimes.

Ang

[OPTIMIST12]

I will be honest and say I have never heard the word coeliac before. I have seen a section for gluten-free foods in Tesco but never equated these with a particular dietary requirement. What exactly is gluten?

I am shocked by the price for a loaf of bread and wafers. Is the high price because of special production processes or because they are specially produced in small quantities?