iva with payplan

suziepoor

hello
i've been on a cccs dmp all year which i've totally messed up due to having to move house and need money, and other problems which were my fault.
Anyway I want to get on track and start sorting my debt out once and for all.
Ive contacted payplan and there going to do a full check/review on me then advise what is best. I think they may advise an IVA - has anyone had any experience of this?
I've heard bad things about them - like your just paying the IP fees for the first few years then it goes wrong and your left with the same amount of debt?
I have 25k debt and can afford around £375 a month.
Ive had probs all year on dmp with creditors still charging interest and charges to my account etc.

Please help
Thank you x
Suzie

Deep_In_Debt

All IVA providers are the same no matter who you go with, you will still have to pay fees for them to administer the IVA. Your creditors will receive very little or nothing for a while as your payments will be covering IP fees. Do look into an IVA carefully as they are generally suitable for only a small amount of people. If it goes wrong, it could also end in BR.

Try CCCS or speak to Payplan again and see if they can help with a dmp. Creditors are not legally obliged to freeze interest on a dmp but most do...you just have to appeal to their better nature and persevere with them.

Charco_2

This place is ridiculous!
"I've had problems with CCCS all year..."
"well, why don't you go speak to CCCS!"

Suzie, look into the IVA option, if you feel any confidence in it then go for it, it's not really a solution "just for the small select lucky few with a birthmark of the crown jewels under their left arm"

The fees your IP will earn will be broken into two parts
1. Nominees: Say this is around £1,500 and represents the costs of the IP researching and drafting your proposal - the first four months payments you make to your IVA will cover this cost.
2. Supervisors: This is an annual fee your IP earns for basically watching over your IVA. Say about £500 a year so your first two payments each year...

Something i would be cautious about though is that you were unable to maintain your payments in the DMP...

Good luck.

Nargleblast

If you do look into an IVA, compare different companies. I have heard that some do indeed take a year or more's worth of payments in fees before paying out to creditors, whilst others start paying out to creditors well within the first year. So a good question to ask would be "at which point (or in which month) during the five year term would my creditors start receiving payments?"

From my experience of being in an IVA for the past 8 months, it is the best solution for my circumstances but I really have to watch the budget every month. As Charco says, you had problems budgeting with a DMP - you will have to be more disciplined about it in an IVA, but that is not a bad thing - we all need to learn how to handle money better, don't we?

Just get as much info as you can and then decide if it is right for you. And once a decision is made, stick to it and make it work.

clavius_2

I went into an IVA with Payplan six years ago. They were really helpful to me when I was in a desparate situation. The secret is that you have to be serious about wanting to sort yourself out and be completely honest and upfront from the start. If you're elligable most agreements are over 5 years and whilst this can seem an eternity, stick at it, it's worth it.

coolcait

Charco wrote: »

look into the IVA option, if you feel any confidence in it then go for it, it's not really a solution "just for the small select lucky few with a birthmark of the crown jewels under their left arm"

.

Re the part in blue - I think that the point which is often made on this forum is that an IVA (or Trust Deed in Scotland) is a form of personal insolvency. As is bankruptcy.

If someone has the reached the point where declaring themselves insolvent is their best/only option then - technically - a minority are better served by opting for an IVA. If you go by the legislative intention.

Despite my general cynicism regarding the selling of IVAs/Trust Deeds, I do accept their rightful place in the options open to people who are dealing with debt. And, I believe that pro-IVA/Trust Deed opinions are necessary for a board like this, so that people can see all sides. In general, I find your posts on the subject informative and helpful.

So, why include misrepresentations like the part I highlighted in blue, and your twisting of the OP's statement about the CCCS DMP (she didn't say "I've had problems with CCCS all year...", she said "i've been on a cccs dmp all year which i've totally messed up due to having to move house and need money, and other problems which were my fault.")?

You're perfectly capable of arguing the pro-IVA corner without descending to that level. I accept that it may have been meant tongue-in-cheek. However, given the level of suspicion about your profession, why leave such an inviting opening for people to say 'Ha! If the IVA industry can twist things like that - where we can all see what they're up to - what on earth are they telling vulnerable people in private?'

I do totally agree with the final line of your post. However, before taking the step into personal insolvency, I don't see that there would be any harm in the OP having a serious discusssion with CCCS about the reasons why she didn't keep up payments. It may have been down to a combination of circumstances, and there may be scope to re-do it.

Or, there may not. She won't know till she checks.

Charco_2

There was no mis-representation! The first line says they've been in a CCCS DMP all year, the last line says they've had problems all year in their DMP. My point was not an attack on the CCCS, (altho a year on and interest fees and charges ongoing is hardly impressive!). My point was actually about the standard of advice on these boards sometimes... ie "go to the cccs!" ↲ Got Debt? Go to CCCS! Cut your hand? Go to the CCCS! Having problems with CCCS? Go to CCCS! ↲ My comment was merely a paraphrase and not the actual point of the post. (Dont know why there's any suspicion over me - i wont blindly repeat the CCCS mantra, i dont trust them and certainly dont believe in their charitable interests, which i know annoys some on here, but you cant fault me other than that!)

coolcait

Charco wrote: »

There was no mis-representation! The first line says they've been in a CCCS DMP all year, the last line says they've had problems all year in their DMP. My point was not an attack on the CCCS, (altho a year on and interest fees and charges ongoing is hardly impressive!). My point was actually about the standard of advice on these boards sometimes... ie "go to the cccs!" ↲ Got Debt? Go to CCCS! Cut your hand? Go to the CCCS! Having problems with CCCS? Go to CCCS! ↲ My comment was merely a paraphrase and not the actual point of the post. (Dont know why there's any suspicion over me - i wont blindly repeat the CCCS mantra, i dont trust them and certainly dont believe in their charitable interests, which i know annoys some on here, but you cant fault me other than that!)

The last line of the OP says that she has had problems on the DMP all year with creditors still charging interest and charges. Arguably, the problem lies with the creditors rather than CCCS on that point. As there is no legislative force to stop creditors charging interest/fees and charges on a DMP.

All of the foregoing still means that you have taken an interpretative jump in writing "I've had problems with CCCS all year..." in relation to the OP.

CCCS are not perfect. No solution is. Including the IVA solution, where people are often advised that an IVA is their best option - by the people who earn their wages by administering IVAs.

From my observation of the boards, there is no blind mantra pointing peope only to CCCS. People are pointed to a number of agencies, including CCCS. Personally, I often forget to even mention them , or National Debtline, because I feel that the locally based advisers - in CAB etc - are better placed to advise Scottish debtors, given that our system is different.

I suppose my question now is - are you here to help? Or are you here because of your views on CCCS?

Nargleblast

Suziepoor - any more news? Did Payplan get back to you?

mumslave

I dont trust payplan at all, we were with them for 18 months on a dmp after they actually told us we werent eligible for a trust deed (scottish equivalent of IVA) as we didnt have enough debt...we had 17 grand at that point. Thankfully I looked elsewhere and hubby is now in a protected trust deed, very suitable for us as we had same problems with creditors refusing to stop interest/charges so in 18 months our debts had gone up, not down, even though we made our payments every month. He pays £185 a month to the trust deed, very little goes to the creditors admittedly but there would have been no point in them pushing for his bankruptcy had it not gone protected as he has no assets (no owned home, no car etc). I was told that payplan are mostly funded by various creditors too....

But thats just my experience and I do know they have helped lots of people.

Charco_2

From my observation of the boards, there is no blind mantra pointing peope only to CCCS. People are pointed to a number of agencies, including CCCS.
Really? It's generally the first reply any post on here gets! "have you spoken to CCCS?" "i think you should try the CCCS!" Even straight after the person has said they've been with the CCCS! The board "guides" all seem to have a schpeil about the saintly CCCS in their signatures and at the top of some forums there is a section where you can "ask a CCCS Counsellor". CCCS are now the only advisors allowed to post in their company name, whereas previously other companies were allowed to post too. The debt guides/reports regarding the various debt solutions all recommend that you speak to the CCCS or other "charities" before going with any solution.

The last line of the OP says that she has had problems on the DMP all year with creditors still charging interest and charges. Arguably, the problem lies with the creditors rather than CCCS on that point. As there is no legislative force to stop creditors charging interest/fees and charges on a DMP.
Well for me, this always raises the question (impossible to answer i suppose) what more can be done to have the interest and charges stopped? I'm aware it's at the discretion of the creditors, but since we know that all creditors do, at some stage or other, freeze the fees why after a year (in this example) have they still not frozen charges? We're told the banks pay the charity a "fair share contribution" of monies received - around 12.5% i'm led to believe - so it's better for the debtor to use a charity than a private DMP company... unless the private comany can get the charges stopped that the CCCS hasn't! If interest and charges aren't stopped then basically the banks are using your money to pay for your DMP anyway!

All of the foregoing still means that you have taken an interpretative jump in writing "I've had problems with CCCS all year..." in relation to the OP.
There was no "interpretive jump", just like there was no "mis-representation". I paraphrased the OP certainly (first line and last line) but did not change the meaning of anything that was said and on top of that, the thrust of my point was not concerning the CCCS (who ran the DMP she had a problem with). The point is that the OP raised her problem and instead of getting a considered and tailored response she was told to go to the CCCS despite having already said that that was who she was with and it wasn't working out!

CCCS are not perfect. No solution is. Including the IVA solution, where people are often advised that an IVA is their best option - by the people who earn their wages by administering IVAs.
This is pathetic again. The IVA boogey man does not exist! The legislation (and watchful eyes of the creditors) are there to make sure that square pegs aren't shoved into round holes!
You can't be a little bit pregnant, you either are or you aren't - you're either insolvent or you're not! If you're insolvent then you can opt for bankruptcy or an IVA - or you can ignore the problem and go for an 18 year DMP with no protections. Personally i know which i would choose!

I suppose my question now is - are you here to help? Or are you here because of your views on CCCS?
Do i help? I suppose that's not for me to say!

***I hope you don't consider the fact that i answered your paragraphs a little out of sequence as me somehow mis-representing you or playing with your interpretive sovereignty!***