www.iva.co.uk

I am planning to start an IVA - having talked to an advisor at the Debt Advice Trust www.debtadvicetrust.org I was wondering if I am dealing with the best company to start an IVA through?

Hello Treadwer and welcome to the forum [:)] It's always a good idea to check out a few firms before deciding. Why not visit www.iva.com which compares and reviews a lot of IVA providers

The debt advice trust is a marketing tool for debt free direct and its associated companies, it is not independent.
As stated, go to www.iva.com and check out the reviews, you would do well to look at dfd and their reviews and make your own mind up.

Good luck.

Thanks for the advice. I am not going to use this company.

If your completely unsure then consider a debt charity such as CCCS or Payplan. Altarnatively mail one of the IVA professionals on this site.

Avoid the IVA factories.

Just to clarify that neither CCCS or Payplan do IVAs on a free of charge basis, but charge normal commercial rates. The free service they offer is for DMPs only.

The fees that CCCS charge are the cheapest in the UK though aren't they ?
I have heard DFD referred to as Debt Free Disgrace !! I am not a fan of DFD sorry !! seen too many of their VAs fail for any number of reasons. They represent the 'factories' that i dislike so much.. Sorry ![V]

I don't think so - they seem to be charging commercial rates from what I have seen, and they have staff and overhead costs to cover just like the rest of us.

I'm not sticking up for IVA factories - I too have my own views about the quality of service provided to both debtors and creditors alike.

Hi Mel, I think that you will find they charge a max of 5K and all profits are covenanted to the Foundation for Credit. They are operating the IVA's using the same principles and ethics as CCCS. Clients who end up in one of their IVAs will only have done so if its is firmly established that this is the right option for them !

I forgot to add, the process involves many checks & balances and by the time the VA is proposed the client will fully understand the implications and have realistic expectations.

I have been very impressed with what I have seen so far [8D]

I note what you say, but I have been running my practice in the same manner for the last 10 years so there are no suprises there! And a lot of practitioners fees are less than £3k for the whole job.

If they feel that they can provide a better service for a cheaper fee then I commend them, however the people to whom it really matters - ie the creditors who are effectively gaining from the reduced charges you quote - appear remarkably indifferent to the process.

Do you know how many of their clients they actually meet on a face to face basis, or whether their sole IP makes it a habit to speak to each one of her clients personally? I would be interested to know.

I take your point Melanie but lets be honest, not many IP's charge as little as 3K do they ?

In my experience the industry average has been nearer 7k. I used to work closely with GT for a number of years and can not 'prove or disprove' your figure but have come across the figures I stated many times in the last 8 years. The factories seem to charge whatever they can get away with. I have some friends who have worked with an insolvency company (no i cant name them sorry) and they have also given me a sorry insight into the practices of some !

As for the face to face scenario, well I really have no idea if this happens or not. I think that they have arrangements in place for clients to go into the regional centres dotted across the country. As for the IP meeting FTF with every client I dont think thats very practical for any company do you ? Are you sure that they only have 1 IP ?

I have just contacted someone 'in the know' and they confirm that the MAX cost is 5K but the average could be less for the majority of its clients.

as for quality etc, well I hope it works out, I certainly applaud the intentions. You have many successful years of practice Melanie, I hope these guys reflect the good practices that your clients testimonials commend you with.

The debt solution market certainly is big enough to cope with this extra competition but the new guidelines and creditor perception may see some of the more unscrupulous forced to think again !

Yes - fairly certain they only have one IP unless they have recruited recently, and whether you feel it is practical or not for IPs to meet their clients, we all have to observe the requirements of SIP 3. I still meet or personally interview on the telephone all of my clients.

I agree that the recently introduced protocol will sort the men (and women!) out from the boys and if CCCS can demonstrate that they are the best in the profession they are likely to be inundated with work - which of course they will have to be able to do on a limited budget.

There is always room for fresh ideas, new players and better practices in our profession - as well as the debt industry generally, and it will be interesting to see which firms survive the recent changes.

I am sure that CCCS would love to think of themselves as 'the best' but they will have to stand the test of time. More importantly the test of thier clients & the creditors.

As we all know, the horror stories out there come from disgruntled clients, if CCCS dont cut the muster it wont be long before the stories surface.

Going back to the FTF and one to one with the IP. I commend you for being able to do this but I dont think it is a SIP.3 requirement for each and every client. [?]

3. Initial Contact with the Directors/Debtor
3.1 [IVA] On initial contact with the debtor, the member should offer to meet personally, or arrange for a suitably experienced member of his staff to meet the debtor. If the debtor declines the offer, the
member or a suitably experienced member of his staff may conduct the initial interview on the
telephone. However, if during the telephone interview, the interviewer forms the opinion that either
the debtor does not fully understand the matters described in paragraphs 3.2 to 3.5 or that the
debtor has not adequately disclosed his financial circumstances, the member should insist that a
meeting in person be conducted. In view of the complex nature of VAs involving trading individuals
or companies, a meeting in person should always be conducted.