Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    Find The Real
    IVA support and discussion thread
    • #1
    • 28th Sep 13, 4:07 AM
    IVA support and discussion thread 28th Sep 13 at 4:07 AM
    IVA's. There is a lot to talk about so I have started this thread for anything IVA related.

    Whether you want to debate any aspect of an IVA, ask a question, share your IVA journey including high and low points or offer support, are thinking of starting an IVA and have a million questions or having completed an IVA you want to share your experience and knowledge, hopefully this thread can offer a chance to do just that.

    It's not exclusively for those in the IVA club, anyone is welcome to join in but please kindly remember this thread is not for judgement.

    Wisdom comes from experience. Experience is often a result of lack of wisdom.
Page 2
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 9th Oct 13, 8:48 PM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Going back to the issue of secured loans for equity release, this comment from an IP on another forum got my attention:

    'this will become an issue time and time again. Creditors are already getting wise to IVA proposals where there is significant equity by putting in minimum dividend requirements based on the projected equity release. This could mean that some properties will have to be sold in the future to meet these requirements'.

    One of the significant reasons I went for an IVA is that my property is protected. It would seem that, going forward, this may not be the case for some new IVA proposals.

    I suppose a customer faced with this clause in their IVA contract may well find the thought of a secured loan a lot more acceptable than selling their home.
    Originally posted by UpToMyNeckInIt
    Hi

    Can the leanings of the quoted comment be evidenced or is this just another way of laying the foundations of getting money out of people?

    They might also ask that they thought the whole idea of going down the IVA route in the first place is to become debt free after years of paying their disposable income, not to face the risk of losing their home or get lumbered with a secured loan at the end of the struggle.

    We keep hearing about these never ending Debt Management Plans and you are better off in an IVA, really! when you look at the equity issue and now the secured loans. I wonder how much is paid back over how long with this equity clause and don't forget anything secured on the property puts your home at risk if the are problems making the payments, what do these brokers care then when they have disappeared with their commission and fees?

    Write off large percentages of your debts the IVA adverts say, really!

    Reading some of the stuff around now, it makes you wonder if people will steer clear of IVAs altogether as probably do a fair percentage of the tens of thousands of failed IVA 'customers' already feel they should have done (I know quite a few, most of which ended up going bankrupt)

    There does not seem to the same clamour as far as the returns on PPI claims where huge percentages (thousands of pounds in some cases) are going outside the IVA and into the pockets of the commission agents and profiteers!

    Are people currently in IVAs where the 12 month clause is clear being approached by brokers with regard to considering, discussing and taking out a secured loan and if so, why?

    Are IVAS just a money making 'product' where the goalposts just keep being moved?

    Fair questions that people might think to ask maybe?

    My take
    Last edited by Depth Charge; 09-10-2013 at 9:18 PM.
    • UpToMyNeckInIt
    • By UpToMyNeckInIt 10th Oct 13, 8:09 AM
    • 878 Posts
    • 469 Thanks
    UpToMyNeckInIt
    Fair points, but let's put this into perspective:

    1). Until I actually see the exact terms of one of these 'projected equity release' IVA's (sound a bit like some of the pre-2010 protocol plans that I have heard about, I guess), it is probably too early to speculate on the exact repurcussions;

    2). Any equity release (loan or mortgage) is still I assume, limited by the existing affordability criteria (ie: repayments are limited to a maximum of half your current IVA payment, with the remainder of any IVA payments reduced accordingly).

    3). The DMP option (or indeed any other option like going BR): Yes, faced with the prospect of potentially having to 'sell-up' anyway, or take out a sub-prime secured loan, this has to be considered more favorably, dependant upon each person's circumstances.

    BUT, with the IVA your credit history is restored 6 Years after the START of the arrangement, at which point you can start to look for a more reasonable re-mortgage to settle any existing sub-prime mortgage/loan. With the DMP, your credit history is trashed for the duration, + 6 Years after your LAST payment.

    4). As appalling as some of these loan interest rates/fees are, they still pale into comparison with the potential interest charged by the creditors over the duration of a 10+ year DMP.

    5). Agree: IVA's are a money-making product, but so are DMPs. Example: An individual with a £36K debt. Fees in a typical IVA - £4K give or take. About the same as the 11% fee charged by Stepchange/NDL etc. to the creditors (sorry, that should be 'creditor voluntary donations'), in a DMP - and that is assuming ALL interest is frozen with every creditor for the duration of the plan. Realistically, it is more than likely, with a DMP running 10+ years that these interest fees/creditor donations will far exceed IVA fees.

    Furthermore, if that DMP is with a private firm, well fees of £30-40pcm are not unheard of, and the customer has to pay them!!!

    It is also much harder to move goalposts in a formal, legally binding IVA contract, than in an informal DMP.

    Just my cynical view.
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 10th Oct 13, 9:38 AM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Hi

    There is sometimes a big issue made of the 6 year period on getting further credit.

    A fair point perhaps would be that lenders will not be too keen on giving credit to those who have been in any formal debt solution even after the 'clearing' period has elapsed.

    There are probably a fair percentage of IVAers who would not really feel the need to get into substantial or any debt for that matter again anyway.

    It could be argued that this 6 year rule 'advantage' of an IVA is just another marketing and selling angle for IVAs and again I point to the shocking high percentage of IVAs that fail.

    I don't really agree on your point about moving the goal posts as a DMP is an informal agreement therefore arguably the debtor is significantly less trapped - just look at the PPI issue to see my point.

    I also think you may be a bit low on some of the monthly private DMP fees

    As far as interest and charges are concerned in DMPs the advice industry are and indeed should be addressing this, the protocols are being touted it would seem.

    If people manage their own Debt Management Plans then there are no fees or donations to the profit makers or so called charities so the creditor return is more.

    Again I will pose these questions that nobody seems to want to answer or properly address -

    Are people who are currently in IVAs being approached by brokers with regard to secured loans where the terms of their IVA are clear on the 12 month extension equity clause and if so, why?

    As far as independent impartial advice is concerned, how can anybody justify such huge percentages of PPI claims going outside the arrangement - ex: not to the IVAer or the creditors which are the actual people I thought the IVA was supposed to be all about?

    The truth is that where profit, financial interest in a solution and debt advice is concerned, then it cannot ever be classed as truly independent and impartial as more an more people are cottoning on to.

    The way me and others are seeing things then it seems to be getting to the stage where people are going into debt solutions where they will never be debt free, the exceptions being Debt Relief Orders and bankruptcy, but of course there is little or no profit or financial 'donation' in the latter two solutions.

    Then there is the issue of falling incomes as we see on the TV and read in the newspapers almost everyday now - what is being done to help the people in debt solutions where this is the case anything? or maybe the cynic in me has a suspicion that we are moving the goal posts.

    Oh, I just happen to have picked up the papers on the Stepchange 2013 expenditure allowance budget figures while I type, really interesting on the clothing allowance and other sections.

    Think this review and figures could hit the screens soon and could be an interesting discussion point especially given that according to what I have been told the CFS & Stepchange trigger figures are being looked at for the purpose of 'harmonising'

    Really interesting, cant wait for any Stepchange comments

    My take
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 10th Oct 13, 9:56 AM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Hi

    Just to expand on the clothing allowance issue already mentioned

    This is basically what I have read and understand the situation to be - (if it is wrong then I more than welcome anyone in the know who can correct me or clarify the situation)

    The minimum clothing guideline will be set to zero for single / couple budgets, and adult multipliers

    There, maybe that should start the debate for now - any comments welcome especially from Stepchange.

    It has really got me and a few others scratching our heads so I thought it would make a genuine discussion point

    If Stepchange wish to expand or update us then that would be great as this surely has to be in the interests of those currently engaged and looking at a debt solution along with advisers really.

    Meanwhile I will have a look into putting up things in more detail as not to cause any unnecessary confusion etc.

    My take, genuine curiosity and interest
    Last edited by Depth Charge; 10-10-2013 at 10:15 AM. Reason: Further thought and investigation may be necesary
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 10th Oct 13, 10:35 AM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Hi

    I thought it would be worth mentioning this before any potential further comments

    One of my colleagues has just had a go on the debt remedy tool and tells me that it does appear that there is now no minimum for clothing and footwear when a single adult is inputted, even more interesting is that the food \ housekeeping minimum suggested amount has been reduced to £110 per month - I am sure it was previously set at £115 per month.

    mmm, real food for thought, very important issues and surely at least worth comments or an explanation from Stepchange??

    The Stepchange expenditure allowances are mentioned in the IVA protocol and used in IVAs, their own DMPs and Debt Remedy Tool.

    Setting payment amounts and reviews!

    Stepchange are almost 100% funded by the creditors and receive donations from creditors in relation to their Debt Management Plans.

    There is also another widely used and industry recognised set of expenditure guideline figures called the Common Financial Statement (CFS) that are updated on a regular basis - as far as I know none of these figures have actually been reduced. A number of the CFS expenditure allowance figures are much more generous and again the CFS is clearly mentioned in the IVA protocol.

    Very interesting discussion points indeed given the context of this and other threads for that matter.

    Who's going to be first?

    My take
    Last edited by Depth Charge; 10-10-2013 at 10:53 AM.
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 10th Oct 13, 12:45 PM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Hi

    Scratching our heads even more on the Stepchange allowances after reading this from one of their spokesmen

    http://www.stepchange.org/Mediacentre/Pressreleases/Inflationfalls.aspx

    Can anybody spot any potential contradiction maybe?

    Oh dear P

    My take
    Last edited by Depth Charge; 10-10-2013 at 12:48 PM.
    • UpToMyNeckInIt
    • By UpToMyNeckInIt 10th Oct 13, 2:00 PM
    • 878 Posts
    • 469 Thanks
    UpToMyNeckInIt
    DC - you have covered a lot in your last 4 posts!!!

    I understand your point about the formalily of an IVA arrangement being potentially a disadvantage (as you correctly point out: You are trapped). You either have to let the IVA: 1. go to term; 2. fail - be back to sqare one with your creditors, face possible BR; or 3. Be in a position to offer a 'Full & Final settlement'.

    I agree as well tha your credit rating is not the be all and end all. Nor am I suggesting that insolvent people want a pristine credit rating again to get straight into more bad debt. But it means more than that: Access to 'proper' bank accounts, renting property, car/van hire, mobile phone contracts, being able to pay your insurance monthly, finance a half-decent, reliable car etc. Additionally, for home owners: yes, the ability to shop around for a better mortgage deal occasionally, is a considerable advantage.

    Furthermore, the question asked by many creditors about previous 'special repayment arrangements' - or similar terminoligy, applies to DMPs and IVAs alike.

    I can maybe live without some of the above privileges for 6 Years, but for 15-20? Not something I would wish on anyone in a hurry.

    Regarding the question re: equity release you pose about how IVA customers are approached by loan brokers: In all the cases I have read about, the customer alleges that a particular company has been suggested by their IVA provider. Cosy arrangement don't you think?

    Where can we find the latest SC Budget guideleines? The lowering of allowances could be interesting at review time!!! (Though I am more interested in the 'guideline' and 'maximum' allowances, not the 'minimum' - of course that could be zero in most categories.

    As I have alluded to previously, I have it on good authority from IPs posting on other forums, that creditors argue the toss over applying the CFS or SC Budget Guideline figures, often insisting on the latter. Well they would wouldn't they: Another cosy arrangement: insist on the application of the tighter figures, drawn up by their buddies at Stepchange (in turn funded by the exact same creditors), to maximise return.

    I agree: what is the point of allowing CFS in the protocol, if nobody is in a position to use them? Does anyone know if any IVA firm applying CFS?
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 10th Oct 13, 3:02 PM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Hi

    Yes, quite a lot in there.

    I have the new Stepchange Budget report and new guideline figures in front of me. The report makes very interesting reading especially one particular section on clothing allowances.

    I will be back on this later as this is very likely to turn into a somewhat controversial issue, it will not go away there is no need to worry about that.

    Hopefully the figures will be available for pubic viewing soon, I think they may have a little explaining to do.

    You mention reviews, mmm, very interesting indeed.

    My take
  • Find The Real
    Some very interesting comments regarding the whole IVA issue.

    I think it has become quite clear from looking at information on the web that the IVA route has become far more complicated over the last couple of years with the issues of PPI and equity release and that is some cases creditors are pushing for secured loans as an option whereas perhaps in the past they may have just gone for the extra year. The main problem I have with this is that the goalposts certainly seemed to have been moved for those already in an IVA and may not be what they originally signed up for.

    It is quite obvious that IVA's are going to fail if living costs are reduced based on SC guidelines, meaning more for the creditors and I am sure there are many out there that wish they had never entered into an IVA.

    I can see how entering an IVA could be a disadvantage with all the problems that are attached to it, especially as it is entirely possible a few years in to find you are unable to meet the repayments and end up having to go bankrupt anyway and this is why I think there should be much more clarity over what an IVA entails and the possible pitfalls rather than a lot of companies glossing over all that and promoting how much debt can be written off instead.

    Just my views on some of the issues.

    Wisdom comes from experience. Experience is often a result of lack of wisdom.
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 18th Oct 13, 9:50 PM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Some very interesting comments regarding the whole IVA issue.

    I think it has become quite clear from looking at information on the web that the IVA route has become far more complicated over the last couple of years with the issues of PPI and equity release and that is some cases creditors are pushing for secured loans as an option whereas perhaps in the past they may have just gone for the extra year. The main problem I have with this is that the goalposts certainly seemed to have been moved for those already in an IVA and may not be what they originally signed up for.

    It is quite obvious that IVA's are going to fail if living costs are reduced based on SC guidelines, meaning more for the creditors and I am sure there are many out there that wish they had never entered into an IVA.

    I can see how entering an IVA could be a disadvantage with all the problems that are attached to it, especially as it is entirely possible a few years in to find you are unable to meet the repayments and end up having to go bankrupt anyway and this is why I think there should be much more clarity over what an IVA entails and the possible pitfalls rather than a lot of companies glossing over all that and promoting how much debt can be written off instead.

    Just my views on some of the issues.
    Originally posted by Find The Real
    Hi Find the Real

    Great post again in my opinion

    The recent huge gas price rises just show how fragile things can be when you are in a payment arrangement, especially an IVA.

    You see this type of in your face price increase is on an essential expenditure, a priority expenditure, so it is hard to argue that an allowance should not be made both in IVAs, Debt Management Plan or Bankruptcy Payment Agreements / Orders.

    This is where any arrangement where there is a financial interest for the provider of the debt solution arguably will come under the spotlight - maybe an allowance can be made for extra gas costs but perhaps you might now spend less on your clothing and footwear - what a joke

    As well documented and predicted by some, finances and the cost of living have been hammered over the last 18 months and are set to get worse, a real problem for those in debt payment arrangements, similar problems apply to the actual IVA & Debt Management Plan providers both profit makers and 'donation' set ups - it is a fact and they know it.

    The sheer scale now of the income cuts / pay freezes & huge cost of living increases are going to bring heavy pressure in many areas of debt and debt advice.

    A number of rigid business plans are looking like shaky pudding with no where to go really - it may get a little silly and obvious the way things are going, but they have nowhere to go and they know it.

    It is becoming a massive issue and problem for some agencies and providers, but not all.

    Something has to give, people need help or basically payment arrangements will fail or more worrying will be set up to fail or made to fit perhaps.

    People will never be debt free and in many cases get further into debt and alarmingly priority debt such as mortgage, rent, council tax etc.

    The figures just don't add up guys and it is all starting to stack up.

    Genuine independent impartial advice is set to be tested like never before

    The deafening silence in some quarters is getting so obvious now, you cant hide forever though, the basic maths and shrinking money in peoples pockets will see to that.

    Others are going to be left with the mess, and guess what, we are not going to stay silent, come what may we have no choice and after all it is supposed to be about genuine independent, impartial advice is it not?

    More info to come, watch this space

    My take as always
    Last edited by Depth Charge; 18-10-2013 at 10:26 PM.
    • UpToMyNeckInIt
    • By UpToMyNeckInIt 19th Oct 13, 9:55 AM
    • 878 Posts
    • 469 Thanks
    UpToMyNeckInIt
    Hi DC,

    Fair points to an extent, we do hear of people regularly struggling when bills go up etc.

    As you say, if you spend more in one area you have to cut back on another - but that's life for everybody, not just IVA customers.

    OK, so my gas/electric bill goes up £20pcm. So what?

    'Normal' people, what do you do? Cut back in other areas? Oh no, nearly forgot - it goes on a credit card - and we all know where that leads.

    I would advise switching to a better deal. Heck, if you refer yourself to u-switch via MSE, you even get a free case of wine!!!

    Simple fact is, if IVA customers cannot wait until review time, you can contact your IVA company and, lousy customer service aside in some cases, you should be able to argue for an immediate adjustment in IVA payments.

    Most IVA's allow for a 15% reduction in payments without your IP having to seek creditor's permission. So it should not be a big deal frankly.

    In many cases mid-term IVA-ers, have had IVA-repayments increase because of rise in income, so in these cases payments can be reduced to allow for increased bills, whilst still meeting creditor dividend forecasts.

    I also say that it is important to claim against ALL the allowances that the Stepchange budget guideline allow. Even if you don't use them for that purpose, it helps in scenarios like this.

    I do concede however that many IVA customers are hovering on the brink of financial viability. Those who are deemed to be able to afford to repay £100ish per Month when their IVA was proposed.

    What has happened in many cases is the IVA company has stopped making allowances once they reach this figure, as doing so would make the IVA a non-starter. Victims of IVA mis-selling in a nutshell.

    Even small increases in outgoings for these cases is a huge problem, and could ultimately cause the IVA to fail. Then they are back to square one.
  • Find The Real
    Some very interesting points from you both DC and UTMNII, one point I was especially interested in was those who have very low payments into their IVA's which we are seeing quite of a few of these days.

    When you get some that are paying only £100 per month on a relatively low payment of debt, I have to agree that perhaps they were not given the best advice of how to deal with their debts.

    I also have to agree so much of it again boils down to the allowances and how there is not a lot of consistency with them - much like many aspects of the whole IVA process. Perhaps it is not morally right but I really do think people when entering an IVA should try to claim as much as they can from the outset so that any increases are manageable, especially as we hear so many stories of not getting replies from their IP or any reduction allowed without it being a major process to go through and as we all know bill rises don't wait for the IP to make a decision and can impact the financial situation of those in debt.

    Wisdom comes from experience. Experience is often a result of lack of wisdom.
    • UpToMyNeckInIt
    • By UpToMyNeckInIt 27th Oct 13, 3:19 PM
    • 878 Posts
    • 469 Thanks
    UpToMyNeckInIt
    ...Another good post FTR. The whole thing you mention about allowances got me thinking:

    DC - made the interesting point about the guideline clothing allowance being assigned a min. amount of £0: This I assume, means that an IVA can be considered a viable option, where the applicant feels they are not going to need a scrap of new clothing for the next 5-6 Years!!! Clearly, not a realistic option.

    Setting a min. £0pcm guideline for sports/hobbies, mobile phone, sky TV etc. OK - that's fine - you can exist without those ...but for clothing? What on earth were Stepchange thinking?

    It is guidance like that, which will only give further justification to some IVA companies to ensnare yet more of those people at the lower end of disposable income scale, and the more unrealistic the proposed budget, the more likely the IVA is to fail.

    Then there is FTR's assertion that:

    'people when entering an IVA should try to claim as much as they can from the outset so that any increases are manageable'

    I stance that not only do I agree with (subject to not being stupid or fraudulent of course by claiming for a mobile, sky TV or children that you don't have for example!!!), BUT is also a stance taken by many IVA companies:

    For applicant's deemed to have more disposable income, when they are flogging the IVA to you, companies will in my experience, make it a more attractive proposal, by going with the Stepchange 'max' guideline amounts.

    My firm near enough maxed out my allowances at the proposal stage, a stance that I ensured continued come review time. Personally, I find that my family can live quite comfortably within these.

    For other customers in a similar position I would hope that, providing they too are careful to properly revise their expenditure at annual review time - particularly to counteract any pay-rises etc, their IVA's are more likely to complete.
  • Find The Real
    With the allowances I am thinking that this is where making sure you research all the allowances before you consider an IVA comes in very useful. Fortunately having gone down the DMP route first I had claimed on quite a few things to make sure I had a reasonable budget so when the time came for swapping to the IVA, my statements showed exactly what my income was being spent on each month.

    Again it does seem to be dependant on which firm you choose, it is good that your company were very reasonable in allowing the max for expenditure, but I do wonder if other people get such good advice. Many times you see how just a small increase in bills can mean people struggle to keep up with the payments during their IVA.

    As for the allowances from SC, you do have to wonder just how much "input" there may have been from those that fund it and I do have slight concerns how much those allowances seem to form the guidelines for a lot of DMP and IVA companies, especially when you see a reduction in those allowances at a time when the cost of living is rising far about wage increases.

    Just my own thoughts as per usual.

    Wisdom comes from experience. Experience is often a result of lack of wisdom.
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 28th Oct 13, 11:27 AM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    ...Another good post FTR. The whole thing you mention about allowances got me thinking:

    DC - made the interesting point about the guideline clothing allowance being assigned a min. amount of £0: This I assume, means that an IVA can be considered a viable option, where the applicant feels they are not going to need a scrap of new clothing for the next 5-6 Years!!! Clearly, not a realistic option.

    Setting a min. £0pcm guideline for sports/hobbies, mobile phone, sky TV etc. OK - that's fine - you can exist without those ...but for clothing? What on earth were Stepchange thinking?

    It is guidance like that, which will only give further justification to some IVA companies to ensnare yet more of those people at the lower end of disposable income scale, and the more unrealistic the proposed budget, the more likely the IVA is to fail.

    Then there is FTR's assertion that:

    'people when entering an IVA should try to claim as much as they can from the outset so that any increases are manageable'

    I stance that not only do I agree with (subject to not being stupid or fraudulent of course by claiming for a mobile, sky TV or children that you don't have for example!!!), BUT is also a stance taken by many IVA companies:

    For applicant's deemed to have more disposable income, when they are flogging the IVA to you, companies will in my experience, make it a more attractive proposal, by going with the Stepchange 'max' guideline amounts.

    My firm near enough maxed out my allowances at the proposal stage, a stance that I ensured continued come review time. Personally, I find that my family can live quite comfortably within these.

    For other customers in a similar position I would hope that, providing they too are careful to properly revise their expenditure at annual review time - particularly to counteract any pay-rises etc, their IVA's are more likely to complete.
    Originally posted by UpToMyNeckInIt
    Hi

    The SC reviewed clothing & footwear and other 'allowances' is becoming a bit of an issue and understandably so in mine and others opinions.

    I thought the whole idea of independent impartial debt advice was more or less about the best interests of the debtor.

    How can you start to tinker with allowances like this, what is the explanation? are we trying to make the figures or a solution fit? has to be a fair question in my opinion.

    Are we trying to stop budgets going into defecit both in new assessments and reviews? are another couple of fair questions in my opinion.

    Disposable income is of paramount importance when considering options both at the start of the advice procedure and during the life of a payment arrangement including reviews.

    In a time when the sharp increase in the cost of living is all the rage headline wise then what is going on here/

    How can you have an online Debt Remedy Tool that claims to give a solution in 20 minutes when it is based on these figures.

    The CFS is used in DROs - the CFS is not used by Stepchange via their Debt Remedy Tool so how can this be accurate, now it appears that we have other changes in the allowance figures.

    Just to balance what I am saying - I recently had a B/R case where a IPA was proposed involving a couple and two children - the clothing allowance was £160 per month, no problem - so how can you base accurate advice on the figures used by Stepchange?

    When someone is seeking debt advice then they should be given full advice on all their options and sensible help and guidence with their budgeting as the whole arrangement be it an IVA, DMP, B/R payment agreement / order has to be affordable
    realistic and sustainable and absolutely paramount that it has to be impartial and independent.

    I happen to think the above points and questions are very fair indeed

    Any comments, especially from Stepchange.

    I will be putting more up later

    My take on a subject issue that is set to run and run by the look of things
    Last edited by Depth Charge; 28-10-2013 at 11:40 AM.
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 28th Oct 13, 12:10 PM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    With the allowances I am thinking that this is where making sure you research all the allowances before you consider an IVA comes in very useful. Fortunately having gone down the DMP route first I had claimed on quite a few things to make sure I had a reasonable budget so when the time came for swapping to the IVA, my statements showed exactly what my income was being spent on each month.

    Again it does seem to be dependant on which firm you choose, it is good that your company were very reasonable in allowing the max for expenditure, but I do wonder if other people get such good advice. Many times you see how just a small increase in bills can mean people struggle to keep up with the payments during their IVA.

    As for the allowances from SC, you do have to wonder just how much "input" there may have been from those that fund it and I do have slight concerns how much those allowances seem to form the guidelines for a lot of DMP and IVA companies, especially when you see a reduction in those allowances at a time when the cost of living is rising far about wage increases.

    Just my own thoughts as per usual.
    Originally posted by Find The Real
    Hi

    Another good balanced post again.

    Just to add to UPTMNII's point about no clothing expenditure in an IVA for 5/6 years - what about 10 or more years in a DMP!!!

    My take
    • UpToMyNeckInIt
    • By UpToMyNeckInIt 28th Oct 13, 12:32 PM
    • 878 Posts
    • 469 Thanks
    UpToMyNeckInIt
    Hi DC,

    Another very interesting post.

    £160pcm clothing allowance for a family of 4 - that's really good!!! I know many solvent families who cannot allow themselves a budget that generous.

    Difficult for me to comment further on the CFS figures, because those of us not working in the debt advice/management industry cannot access them.

    But in summary, you are saying that CFS is on balance, more generous than the SC guidelines?

    I also very much get the impression that, despite the IVA protocol allowing CFS or SC Guidelines to be used, IVA companies have their hands tied, and are in reality forced to use the SC Guidelines. Hence, why the all do so.

    The cynic in me wonders if SC are deliberately eroding the IVA minimum allownaces, to make DMP's a more attractive proposition, thus preserving creditor return. Without a logical explanation, in the face of ever-increasing living costs, I am unable to think of an alternative reason.
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 28th Oct 13, 4:49 PM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    Hi

    A logical explanation is what many of us are waiting for!

    It really is astonishing, how can it be explained when you think about it.

    They are in a right bit of a twaddle me thinks.

    Come on Stepchange, lets be having you, its not going away, its going further a little birdie tells me

    My take
    • UpToMyNeckInIt
    • By UpToMyNeckInIt 5th Nov 13, 9:22 PM
    • 878 Posts
    • 469 Thanks
    UpToMyNeckInIt
    A little observation on cost of living:

    I was recently pleasantly surprised: Renewed my Home / Contents Insurance - a whopping £200 cheaper than last year, and that included insuring my bikes 'all risk', meaning that I don't have to renew that £150 per year bike-insurance policy.

    Incidentally, I was able to pay Monthly with AXA as well (this is not shameless advertising, but I know some IVA customers struggle to get Monthly insurance premiums, so listing IVA-friendly insurers can only help).

    ...and my Son cannot wait for the free meerkat toy!

    Sods law I suppose: With energy bills and general living costs going up, the savings are probably going to go in one way and out the other.

    Car insurance next Month: Anyone know which insurers definitely accept Monthly premiums for IVA-ers? Esure who I am with do, but with premiums reportedly going down this year, I am going to shop around.
    • Depth Charge
    • By Depth Charge 5th Nov 13, 10:08 PM
    • 964 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    Depth Charge
    A little observation on cost of living:

    I was recently pleasantly surprised: Renewed my Home / Contents Insurance - a whopping £200 cheaper than last year, and that included insuring my bikes 'all risk', meaning that I don't have to renew that £150 per year bike-insurance policy.

    Incidentally, I was able to pay Monthly with AXA as well (this is not shameless advertising, but I know some IVA customers struggle to get Monthly insurance premiums, so listing IVA-friendly insurers can only help).

    ...and my Son cannot wait for the free meerkat toy!

    Sods law I suppose: With energy bills and general living costs going up, the savings are probably going to go in one way and out the other.

    Car insurance next Month: Anyone know which insurers definitely accept Monthly premiums for IVA-ers? Esure who I am with do, but with premiums reportedly going down this year, I am going to shop around.
    Originally posted by UpToMyNeckInIt
    Hi

    That is some saving on the home insurance along with the bike insurance £350 per year total saving (£29.16 a month) if I have read this right.

    Do they actually allow for a bike insurance policy?

    Very tough times ahead, no doubt about it

    My take
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,648Posts Today

8,774Users online

Martin's Twitter