GT letter. Lawyer states that IP cannot chase you after completion for anything other than PPI

[wh523480]

PPI 2nd letter update from GT:

Just to let everyone know, and for anyone who has received this letter recently, I passed it on to our company lawyer to have a look at the other day as I wasn't sure whether to agree to GT's "proposed changes to the terms," but after reading it he said was OK

The "Deed of Assignment" mentioned in section 4 of the 'Variation details' I was concerned about basically means you are only handing over control to your supervisor to handle any PPI claims on your behalf as they can't without your permission.

Your IP will send you the deed, which, apparently, you will need to sign witnessed by a solicitor!

Our lawyer said the IP cannot chase you once the IVA has finished and you have received your completion certificate for anything else; they just have to follow the correct protocols about PPI reclaiming apparently.

Rick.

[MelanieGiles]

Good job done Rick. I am glad your lawyer concurs with the views of most of us dealing with this in the profession right now.

[geoffr]

I had this checked over too as plenty of my friends are solicitors. Noting wrong with it and if any IP does attempt to chase you then the courts will take action on this as its purely for PPI mis selling and not to attempt a recoup on other assets in the future.

Geoff

[kittyface]

So going by that rationale (that it ONLY pertains to PPI) does that mean that they can't currently legally force you to claim PPI if you have your completion certificate and did not give them permission to do so before they issued it?

I realise you might not know this, but it's worth asking!

[MelanieGiles]

Only if you have a defined asset case which does not include a provision for PPI to be an asset. In an all assets case, the Supervisor is the beneficiary of the trust, which extends past closure

[KAYKAY]

Melanie, I wonder if could clarify. My IVA was taken out in 2005, completed after 6 years in 2011 (unable to release equity). I do not think that it was protocol compliant, as I understand that the new protocol IVA did not exist in 2005. I have recently started to receive loads of junk e-mails advising me to claim for PPI. This is something I have no desire to do as I was aware of the PPI in existence, in addition I have had substantial debt written off thus my belief is it would be immoral to claim in such circumstances. My question now is, could my IVA company force me to claim PPI 2 years on, for the debts that formed part of my IVA. The reason I ask, is I am sure someone recently posted that they had be asked by DFD about PPI post completion. I was with DFD and wonder now if they are entitled or obliged to come back at us for further realisation of funds from PPI.

[MelanieGiles]

It really depends on the wording of your IVA proposaL. The IVA Protocol has nothing to do with whether PPI was included - the specific assets clause will.

If you want to send me a copy through, I can probably answer this for you quickly over the phone.

[Winston123]

font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by MelanieGiles

Only if you have a defined asset case which does not include a provision for PPI to be an asset. In an all assets case, the Supervisor is the beneficiary of the trust, which extends past closure

Melanie,
Can you please explain who exactly will benefit from any assets ?
As I understand it, once the CC has been issued that is officially the end of an IVA, your debts are fully paid and your creditors are happy with the outcome. Who will your supervisor pay ?
Your account is closed, there is no one they can make additional payments to as the court has basically "signed off" on your agreement so legally you are no longer obliged to be bound by the terms of your IVA.
I find it disturbing that an ex supervisor can be allowed to do this even on newly closed cases, and especially in the case of people who have been in receipt of their CC for some time.
So the question remains, who will benefit ? It can't be your creditors, they've been paid, it can't be yourself, it would be immoral, it MUST be someone else then ?

[kittyface]

font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:<hr height="1" noshade>Originally posted by MelanieGiles

Only if you have a defined asset case which does not include a provision for PPI to be an asset. In an all assets case, the Supervisor is the beneficiary of the trust, which extends past closure

Thanks Melanie. I still don't understand why, if that is the case. there is a need for mass variations, as is being seen by IPs in order to close IVAs and pursue PPI after closure. They can do this anyway, so why has this situation arisen in the first place? It just doesn't make sense.

[nickjohn]

I'm getting confused once again with all of this.

If you give your IP a deed of assignment to chase PPI payments then they will never have to ask you the question about PPI ever again as they have an on going authority to act on your behalf for as long as they like, so even after you have your CC the IP could be trying to re coup funds........

The copy of the letter I have says I am giving authority to re coup VAT, PPI or "similar claims", can anyone explain what "similar claims" covers...

As for the distribution of funds the letter details that after the end of the IVA if any additional funds are recouped then they will be held on behalf of the creditors by the IP and distributed in the same proportions as the final dividend of the IVA, so even though the IVA has ceased and is signed off the IP can still claim monies back and send them to creditors, the only time this stops is when the creditors have received 100% back and the IP has received his fees.....

[Foggy]

This is interesting, Nickjohn. I, too, would wonder what "similar claims" could cover.

On the distribution after completion front, I recall, many years ago, I discovered a small outstanding balance on a long forgotten loan and tried to pay it to the company. They refused, saying the loan had been closed and there was nothing they could allocate the funds to.

Interesting, and confusing, times, certainly.

[nickjohn]

Hi Foggy, my understanding is that once its all cut and dried and you have your CC then that's it all done so I too don't quite understand how it will all work.

There seems to be one heck of a lot of pressure from IP's at the moment to get something signed which allows them to chase PPI's, or similar claims, without wanting to go over old ground, or upset Mel, it does just smack of trying to get another revenue stream through the PPI fees..

Probably find in years to come that it should have been treated as a windfall all along and not an asset and claims companies will come along to get some of it back. Interestingly in that scenario the IP could chase themselves for the money and make a fee on paying it back to you......

[MelanieGiles]

Similar claims might be - unfair bank charges, compensation for mis-selling mortgages and secured loans, rate swap claims etc. All such claims would be assets which existed prior to the IVA, and which creditors should ultimately benefit from.

As I have repeatedly confirmed on this forum, the IVA assets are held in trust for the IVA creditors, and that trust eztends beyond the closure of the IVA. Some IPs have decided to use assignnent documents, giving them ultimate power to pursue such assets once a case has been closed, others are seeking variation meetings presumably to cover off other issues as well as dealing with PPI.

And don't think you are going to upset me. I am here to answer queries to the best of my ability, but my advice can never be as good as that you get from your own IPs. PPI monies will never be deemed to be windfalls and noty assets - at least that point is certain.