PPI post IVA BIZZARE

[robster]

What are IVA companies going to do about people whose certificates were issued a long time ago and signed off by the appropriate Court as ended stating there will be no further reports where no deed of assignment has been signed?

Some of these people are now feeling so desperate having thought their IVA was ended, then told after enquiry by their company that they had nothing to do with them now, then claimed PPI and spent it?
This could cause ill health/stress and even suicide through these companies not getting their administration right in the first instance surely? This has to take effect for new cases or such companies are in for some very bad press when it all comes out in my opinion and that of oyhers to whom I have spoken.
Sorry to sound so gloomy but it is and is putting a lot of those who these companies pupported to have helped back at square one?
In addition, if some banks have sent ppi cheques to post IVA people with certificates the banks are to blame? If thi ends up in people being ill and even killing themselves as they thought it was all over will their families have a claim against the IVA companies and the banks is what I want to know?
Feeling very fed up with this whole ridiculous situation and cannot believe the end decision in Green case after 2 decisions were already made how come a final appeal overturns it, despite how I see it going against every element of contractual law in the land?

[Foggy]

The vast majority of cases will be left dormant in this issue, being uneconomical to retrieve from archives or the files will have been destroyed. Nor, I imagine, will insolvency firms have the will or resources to trawl through surviving records in an effort to catch up with past clients.

I would be interested in your observations regarding this going against contract law. My understanding is that the completion certificate releases the debtor from obligations going forward from the date of that certificate. PPI is an asset, albeit unknown at the time, which existed prior to that absolution and, so, is captured.

In my opinion there are many parties at fault here and each must bear their share, but, primarily I feel a lot of fault lies with the Insolvency Service for not stepping up and instituting some sort of set framework at the start of this debacle.

[redboxtree]

Agree with Foggy - there are also things that IVA companies left out when issuing completion certificates which will work against them.

[luna]

Hi

An IVA was great for us as we had a huge debt and therefore a huge amount written off.

We've now found 6 old accounts that had PPI and our company were absolutely not bothered with PPI.

I'm inclined to have a stab at claiming but might leave it closer to the deadline.

Over many years we paid a lot of high interest so I won't fret too much if PPI gets paid to me.

[Michael Peoples]

In my opinion anyone who was paid directly from a creditor in relation to PPI has a genuine argument for why they spent it if done in good faith. However if they signed a declaration that they had never been in an IVA then this may be a different issue if the IP firms go back through their caseloads. There would seem to me little point in pursuing someone who did not know that the money was an asset of their IVA and no guarantee of winning any court proceedings either.

There may be a bigger problem for those IP firms who returned PPI to the debtors or stated that they had no interest in the claims. Creditors in these IVAs may ask questions of the IP but again given the ages of some of these files there may not even be records left. In many cases the debts were bought years ago and I doubt if the debt purchasers still hold details of IVAs from the past.

The unanimous decision of the Appeal Court judges clearly supersedes the decisions of single judges in lower courts and was plainly correct. It gives creditors the same rights in an IVA as they would have in bankruptcy as otherwise a trustee in bankruptcy could pursue an asset that an IVA supervisor could not. The judges agreed that under the R3 standard terms and conditions there is a 'trust' which survives the closure of the IVA but covers any unrealised assets therein. This was always the argument of the supervisor who has an obligation to creditors as well as to debtors but the ultimate decision was made by the court based on the law.

[robster]

Thank you for all the replies some good information is emerging
Michael what if the creditors bank sent cheques post iva to their former debtor then also sent 1 much later on to the IVA company what will the company do with no assignment deed? Will they just keep the 1 cheque or send it back to former debtor or hold it forever?

[Michael Peoples]

I suspect it would depend on the size of the cheque and no doubt any legal advice that the IP would seek. If a creditor has been sending PPI cheques to debtors knowing they had been in IVAs then this could be potentially negligent. Sending subsequent cheques to the IP may improve matters but I am no lawyer.

If an IP receives a cheque for PPI they will have to decide whether it is cost effective to reopen the case and distribute or whether to send the money back to the debtor. If the IP becomes aware that other funds were paid to the debtor then they will have to make a decision as to whether to try and recover these funds.

I do think that there has been a certain amount of hysteria regarding this case and common sense will prevail. Essentially it will be the same banks who were creditors in the IVAs who reimbursed the debtor so any negligence claims will effectively be creditor versus creditor to the delight of the lawyers.

[robster]

Thanks again. My own situation is that after completing an IVA many years ago I have the completion cert there is no deed of assignment or anything like that or any mention of PPI. I didn’t even know about all of this ppi claim thing.
Then sometime later, that 1 particular bank contacted me and said I was entitled to PPI. Despite me stating I was not interested they insisted it was due to me. I rang the IVA company who were too busy to basically speak to me and said my dealings with them had ended and rather abruptly!
So I did do a ppi claim with the bank concerned who sent me a couple of cheques, I truly believed these were mine in all good faith which I have spent, after 5 years and more of living in poverty including in the IVA and I mean that literally like you would not believe. Even the most basic of things such as a pair of boots with soles on and trousers that weren’t glued, honestly – so although these amounts were not tiny they replaced things like a thread bare bed, setee, carpet (although the ones with which they were replaced are bargains not expensive items or still second hand as watching the pennies)
So, the IVA, I got through it and even had a warning at 1 point for paying in too much overtime money of a few hundred pounds! I never got it back though and never asked for it. Shaking with worry, not telling anyone about my situation and just getting on with it to the end was the aim, which I did???
Then, a couple of years later I get a letter from this bank saying they have recalculated the ppi offer and I am in an IVA have sent a further cheque to the IVA company. Just the thought of dealing with them again makes me feel ill literally so I asked the bank to sort it out and sent them my completion cert stating it was the bank who said the money was mine in the first place and persuading me to fill out a claim form.
The same bank then said the IVA company said they had an interest so that was it I would need to contact them if I wanted to pursue it which just the thoughts of going through all that polava again made me take a real step back health wise, when my arthritis flared up again and my stress levels went through the roof, to the extent that I almost jumped in front of a car one day not that long ago when I felt so low, and still do to be honest.
I cannot comprehend that a company who promised to help me be debt free then gave me a certificate to prove it may years later – maybe not now or tomorrow or next month or years, but even years ahead may cause me further stress and anxiety by trying to put me back into debt to repay what the bank itself sent to me and the company made no provision or tell me about ppi or what a deed of assignment was.
I also find it hard to believe that whether the companies will pursue people depends on the size of the amounts but I should have known this. In my opinion rules must be applied equally across the board regardless of amount, to avoid unnecessary discrimination and harassment. If the IVA companies take it upon themselves to pursue people and make their lives a misery but not others due to large or small amounts then this is an admittance that they can flout the law when it suits them but not when they have money to gain themselves or they would not consider it? Sorry but the whole thing is really getting to me.
I have even thought about putting myself into a section as feel unable to cope due to what I thought was a closed matter potentially reopened through all of this. My skin is flaking off all over the place, I am taking calmers! And have been unable to sleep or eat properly since last year when the bank then changed TAC and sent the final cheque to the IVA company.
On top of all of this, I have a spouse who is ill after some boy racers rammed his car off the road, and worries about him getting better and being able to continue with his job of almost 40 years and with no sickness!!!
I have a family member who is dying and I need to keep myself here and together to be there for them but I am finding all of this Green result more and more ridiculous and feel like I am becoming a slave to the post box?? Shattered now
I hope everyone else is having a better time and wish you all well.
The law is the law, it must be interpreted and administered in the same way for individuals, or in my mind, money is allowed to determine whether the law is applied or not? There should be no maladministration from companies who offer to change people’s lives and they do a lot, but to then have the power to put people back in their original position because the companies maladministered the paperwork (I mean did not include ppi or a deed of assignment but issued a completion certificate)- and now thin they can play God all over again,
Bye for now

[Michael Peoples]

I think that firstly you should try and relax and try not to put yourself under any more stress. I personally do not believe that you have done anything wrong and would be amazed if an IP tried to recover the money from you. You spoke to the IP firm who gave you the brush off and you informed the bank who still issued you the money. It will be interesting to see what the IP does with the cheque sent to them as it may not be cost effective to pay it to creditors. They may even send that back to you as it is not the IP's money to keep so keep us informed of what happens next.

[Michael Peoples]

I do hope that you are not stressing as I genuinely believe that no IP is going to pursue you for the money. In addition the Green v Wright case affected IVAs covered by the R3 standard terms and conditions and not Protocol so the money may be yours anyway if you had a Protocol IVA.

In reality, any money that was paid to a debtor post IVA by a creditor is unlikely to ever be recovered. It would not be cost effective to pursue each debtor with no guarantee of success but any money paid to an IP will be retained and distributed to creditors.

I hope this puts your mind a little at ease.

[robster]

It is stressing me to the limit how do I know if it was a protocol iva please Michael thank you

[Michael Peoples]

If you have the original documents it would tell you but if the IVA was a long time ago it could be an R3. However whatever your proposal was I would be totally amazed if you ever hear anything in the future and in the unlikely event that you ever do tell whoever it is to go away and stop harassing you.

The main outcome of the Green v Wright case was that the 'trust' continued post IVA. Therefore any funds paid to you or the IP after completion would form part of that 'trust' but the IVA supervisor would have little sanction against you if you spent the money. In theory perhaps the supervisor or a creditor could try and take steps through the courts to recover the money but in reality this is not going to happen.

[robster]

Thank you for such valuable opinion I am a wreck with it all and you are helping many thanks