suddenly been asked to provide visual proof

[keith5]

I am now into the fourth month of the fourth year of my IVA. So far I have been asked to provide copies of my monthly wage slips, in batches of three, approx every three months, and also an annual assessment of my in & out expenditure. And that has been that. There have been no problems or disputes whatsoever.

Now, right out of the blue, I have suddenly been asked to provide visual proof of home insurance, electricity bill, working families tax credit and travelling costs. The letter they sent me also asks, "enclose copy bank statements which detail your income and expenditure levels over the previous month." Why have I suddenly received these requests so far into the IVA for the first time, and do they have the right to ask for this, and do I have the right to refuse what I consider is an invasion of privacy.

[rayb]

I dont think it is an invasion of your privacy at all and I think they do have the right to see this. I do appreciate that you have been in the IVA for 4 years and they have not done it before but I think you have just been lucky. All they want to do is confirm what you have said which I think is fair enough considering they have taken you on your word before with I & E

[Oliver]

I think that perhaps this is a general practice change of your particular IP and not any reflection on your conduct during the IVA.

[OPTIMIST12]

I would not be worried about this. Sounds like a jolly good I.P. doing a thorough job. As we are all required to notify our IPs immediately of any additional income or change of circumstances anyway then the information will presumably only reflect the figures you have already given them so far? Cant see the problem really.

[ianmillington]

Hi Keith

The extent to which an IP must scrutinise evidence of income and expenditure is quite topical. The new protocol requires IPs to satisfy themselves as to the accuracy of expenditure figures. I for one recall that a couple of months ago when I said on this forum I required my clients to forward bank statements quite a few people expressed some surprise.

The fact is that the creditors are entitled to rely on the proposal as proper evidence of a proposers income and expenditure. If they can't rely on the proposal and the Supervisors periodic reviews of income and expenditure, then the creditors confidence is lost in the process, leading to the blanket rejections and arbitrary hurdle rates lately imposed by certain creditors and which some continue to apply, apparently. Also if income and expenditure is properly scrutinised at the start, the risk of rejection or increase by modification is minimised, so it's in the debtors interest too.

I would see what is happening to you as a good thing, and evidence that your Supervisor is viewing his responsibilities to you and your creditors seriously.

Ian

[zoe]

I agree
I wouldn't have any problems providing if asked
Z

[s.b.w]

Surely this should have been done from the beginning? I know IP's change their requirements and from time to time I have been asked to provide details.

It is a bit of a shock but as long as you've been honest you'll be fine.

Must admit, I slightly over estimated my bills and then worried about the bills not being similar, but they took into acount that I pay an average over the year and not when the bill arrives.

Good luck

[Emily]

I am getting mix messages from these responses? I agreed with the poster that it should have been done from day one.And yes there is new protocol but don't do an inland rev' type tax investigation on it.Go for the real fraudsters...this is what the whole thing is about.

Enclosing travel tickets, shopping reciepts - is this necessary. Maybe expenses you have save as a contigency is seen as a buffer?? Don't anyone even entertain this type of 'Inland revenue approach' of scutiny - it is checkbox management approach that we saw with the FSA!

Expenditure is going up or are Creditors struck dumb by their enormous loses built around ill founded complex Structured investments!

[OPTIMIST12]

I have kept every single bank statement, letter, bill, etc. I have received from anywhere (except shopping receipts!!!!) since my IVA started and my I.P. is welcome to see any of them at any time. I think the more enquiries or investigation the IP does (as they consider necessary) the better - less chance of any unexpected surprises further down the line.

Plus of course there is a 100% responsibility on the debtor to be upfront and honest from the start to the finsh of the IVA process - absolutely NO excuse for anyone to be anything less. An IVA is such a gret second chance - would anyone really deliberately try and conceal anything? One would hope not. That really would be pretty poor behaviour on their part - to say the least.

Going back to the original post - keith5 is concerned about an invasion of privacy. Keith - given that we are all displayed on the Insolvency Register in all our glory - I wouldn't worry too much about sending some documents to your IP!!

[Emily]

I believe Banks statements, ultility Bills, DD mandates are the order of the day for scrutiny. There is a line to be drawn! There should be some privacy in what you are spending on within your allowance. Not every transaction can be accounted for.

You take the family to a day out in Chesington Zoo, and that wouldn't appear in your statement unless you have paid the entry fee on card...??? You stay in nearby hotel, but you don't have a real visa card as thr Banks don't give you one. So you pay in cash. That wouldn't appear either.

I have a dim view of the Banks currently as they have been painted in the corner as very bad bankers bringing the world into credit choas which is now abundantly clear through their bad lending practices in private and commercial lending.Case ajourned and closed

If it wasn't for them we would not have the calmities expressed daily in the papers like it was a War period and less on this board as they wouldn't be insolvent or Bankrupt. We don't see these insolvency rates in other parts of the world like France, Sweden, Japan etc. Don't they spend on credit too?

[rayb]

Emily,

At the end of the day we are here to try and pay back as much as we can in to the IVA to pay our creditors back what we owe them so I think that if it required that you have to supply proof of your expediture then so be it.

[rayb]

You cannot just blame the banks for there lending practices. We have to take responsibility as well as human beings. Nobody put a gun to our heads and told us to take credit out it is just bad circumstances that put us in there situations sometimes i.e. robbing peter to pay paul and so on and so forth

[ianmillington]

To put this into perspective, as an IP I have to balance the interest of debtors and creditors. It's not a full forensic job that needs to be done, after all irrespective of how much you spend each week at Tesco, you are only going to be allowed so much per month as we are all, for better or worse, stuck with the CCCS Guidelines. Where the scrutiny is required is primarily in the area of regular expenditure such as Council Tax where actual figures are used- surely you would expect to have to provide some evidence of that? Bear in mind that at the time you instruct a nominee to act he/she is meant to be your advisor. Anything less than 100% disclosure is a bit like refusing to allow the doctor to take your pulse.

Also it would not be the first time that a review of the bank statements throws up that creditor that the debtor had forgotten about or, likewise, a hitherto overlooked regular expense. Either of these could, theoretically, result in subsequent failure of the VA.

Also, don't forget that the nominee has to provide, in his nominees report, certain assurances to the Court and the creditors on the content of the proposal, its accuracy, whether it is fair to all parties, and whether it is fit for consideration by the creditors. I would ask how can I can satisfy those obligations if I haven't even checked how much Council Tax etc is paid each month. As a by-product, if in his report the nominee can confirm he's checked the regular outgoings, the risk of increased contributions being imposed is vastly reduced.

Conversely, If the nominee hasn't checked them, he must say so. This casts doubt upon the manner in which the IP nominee has done the job and, by implication, the merits of the proposal. It also has regulatory implications for the IP.

Ian

[jpj]

I think we lost our right to privacy the day we blew all the banks dosh and ended up in an IVA!
Keith5 , you have been lucky to get this far with very little grief by the sound of things...Your IP only wants to confirm things...I doubt personally he really cares what your bank stements say,hes just doing his job!
If you win the lottery Keith,then is the time to worry about your "privacy" till then I would keep my head down and give em what they want..most people on here would kill to be in year 4!!!

[louiseh]

I do have one query relating to the issue of providing evidence, say during your application you submitted your true expenditure, only to be told that they didn't fit with the cccs guidelines; but not to worry other figures can be adjusted to take this into account. So how do you know provide evidence?