DCM Nottingham / DCM Money Solutions in administration?

mikewjones_from_wales

NeutralObserver wrote: »

Keep up the good work Mike. Looks like Cleardebt have already flogged a few IVAs which will wipe out the measily 10K they paid for the DCM data. Incidently - if Cleardebt had paid nearer to what that data was worth (I've heard DMC's will pay up to 12times the monthly admin fee for live DM cases) then wouldn't there be more in the pot to distribute to DCM victims? I mean, I know they bought data rather than live cases but 1036 DM clients must have been worth at least £100,000 in my reckoning. Why did the administrators sell it so cheap?

Probably cos it was easy money.

Clearly CLeardebt didnt want the cases novated to them otherwise they would have been liable for the missing money.

As clients were not novated over to Cleardebt then not everone would be obligated to go to Cleardebt although they would be in the driving seat having all the information clearly (no pun intended) to hand.

The only way in which people can by things on the cheap was if they knew there was something wrong with the goods to depreciate its value.

So if this information was worth £100,000 and they got it for £10,000 then clearly they knew something was wrong prior to its purchase.

It would be good to get Rednelly A.K.A Mr Andrew Smith of Cleardebts views, perhaps i should go over to Cleardebts blog for it.

Rednelly_2

mikewjones_from_wales wrote: »

Rednelly AKA Andrew Smith of Cleardebt,

Might i suggest that PRIOR to you cut and pasteing people's comments on here onto your blog you ask them first.

Have no problem with mine im fair game but others may not

if they wanted them posted on there they would have done so of their own free will.

Hi Mike,

Thanks for posting the piece from our blog earlier in the thread.

It was never my intent to disgruntle you by cutting and pasting your post. However, because my posts have been removed from MSE in the past, because I was posting as a company rep, and because I thought the info would be useful to any DCM clients who came across our community thread having not read the MSE post I decided to do what had been done to me elsewhere - Legal Beagles cut and pasted stuff from our blog without so much as a by your leave - not that I minded .

However, moving forward I’ll refrain from copying and pasting MSE content directly, but will continue to address any concerns people have expressed on MSE on our community, in case the responses here get removed.

Rednelly_2

mikewjones_from_wales wrote: »

Probably cos it was easy money.

Clearly CLeardebt didnt want the cases novated to them otherwise they would have been liable for the missing money.

As clients were not novated over to Cleardebt then not everone would be obligated to go to Cleardebt although they would be in the driving seat having all the information clearly (no pun intended) to hand.

The only way in which people can by things on the cheap was if they knew there was something wrong with the goods to depreciate its value.

So if this information was worth £100,000 and they got it for £10,000 then clearly they knew something was wrong prior to its purchase.

It would be good to get Rednelly A.K.A Mr Andrew Smith of Cleardebts views, perhaps i should go over to Cleardebts blog for it.

No. It wasn't easy money. It isn't easy money. One of the reasons the administrators consented to sell the list of client details to ClearDebt was because we said we would do any debt management plans for people currently in Apex DCM debt management plans free of any fee, in perpetuity. That means doing new calculations for every debtor, getting up to date details from creditors putting together a plan, etc - plus getting in the monthly cheques and making distributions to all creditors in five days. It means reviewing clients circumstances regularly and adjusting the plans. For nothing. Zero - zip. Not even for the (roughly 10%) "fairshare" contribution CCCS get from creditors.

Yes, we get protocol-compliant fee IVAs where those are appropriate advice. But there are many, many more DMPs than there are IVAs. The administrators got a fair price. And we are proud of the job we are doing for DCM ex-clients.

Rednelly_2

mikewjones_from_wales wrote: »

Right Guys,

firstly i suggested CAB and CCCS as there are free and have nothing to gain.

I could have suggested the firm that i went with but i not going to do that.

Your interests are cleardebt and its commercial gain in that i understand that but i dont have any interests other than bring DCM directors to the justice they deserved.

You say go to your reviews, i would say to people NEVER NEVER NEVER make that mistake, i check DCM's out and they came out all okay.

"Free advice is not always good advice", but it is impartial boys as you said above your only going to defend the company you work for. So you have a vested interest.

And as for talking to "cleardebt with any concerns" you forget many did that with DCM and look where that got them.

You have to understand here people that there is a saying "one biten twice shy"
The only way you can get an impartial view is if you go to someone whom is impartial.

CAB are free, but often offer only advice - not implementation of a plan. CCCS are funded by creditors. Both organisations do a great job - but they admit they can only deal with around half the people who need debt advice. If CCCS recommend an IVA they get paid the same fees as most commercial providers.

I was at a Money Advice Liaison Group meeting today when someone from the non-fee charging sector was quoted as saying that debt advice in Britain would be on its knees if it wasn't for the reputable fee-charging companies.

ClearDebt advisors all have the Certificate in Debt Resolution - an advanced BTEC that takes around 210 hours study and three examinations. The advice they give is free and it is impartial. We don't need to sell a particular solution. If enough people with debt problems come to us we will keep our staff in jobs simply by giving the right advice all the time.

If someone's best bet is bankruptcy or a DRO - we tell them, even though we don't offer those solutions.

If a Debt Management Plan is right - we tell them, even though, if they are a DCM client, our plans are truly free and cost us money.

If an IVA is best - we say so, and if the client takes it up and it passes, then we make a fee - but no more and no less than any other firm that operates within the IVA protocol. And, of course, if the IVA goes the distance, then it's the creditors that pay - not the client. Yes, we hope to make a modest profit on that. ClearDebt doesn't pretend to be anything other than a commercial company. But one that does the job right.

mikewjones_from_wales

Rednelly wrote: »

Hi Mike,

Thanks for posting the piece from our blog earlier in the thread.

It was never my intent to disgruntle you by cutting and pasting your post. However, because my posts have been removed from MSE in the past, because I was posting as a company rep, and because I thought the info would be useful to any DCM clients who came across our community thread having not read the MSE post I decided to do what had been done to me elsewhere - Legal Beagles cut and pasted stuff from our blog without so much as a by your leave - not that I minded .

However, moving forward I’ll refrain from copying and pasting MSE content directly, but will continue to address any concerns people have expressed on MSE on our community, in case the responses here get removed.

Andrew,

Dont get me wrong i have no problem cut and pasting anything i say, no problems what so ever, however there might be some people that might.

I have extended to you that if there is anything that you believe you can contribute to this thread then i would post or post the link where people can get this information from, and will continue in this regard.

We run a great danger of upsetting people when they pour their feelings out on here talking to other people whom are directly affected by DCM only to find that this has been posted onto other Blogs without their knowledge or consent.

We all on here reply to posts with best of intentions and the best advice we can give.

You havent upset me in anyway i have and will continue to contribute to any discussion on the DCM situation open and frank. There are lessons to be learned by all in all of this.

You cannot understand what it is like to be in this situation, you have to understand that many poeple have been burned by DCM and this will have an effect on how they see the debt industry in general.

we have many infromative discussions not only on your blog but also on the phone, and let that may continue for the best of not only people affected by DCM but that of the other companies still operating in this industry.

Rednelly_2

mikewjones_from_wales wrote: »

Probably cos it was easy money.

Clearly CLeardebt didnt want the cases novated to them otherwise they would have been liable for the missing money.

As clients were not novated over to Cleardebt then not everone would be obligated to go to Cleardebt although they would be in the driving seat having all the information clearly (no pun intended) to hand.

I think it would be good if a contract/insolvency lawyer happened along and clarified this. But my understanding is that novation requires all three parties to agree - in this case the administrator, the client (ie you, Mike ) and the party taking over the cases. In these circumstances novation - even if it was a commercial option, which it wasn't, would be difficult and time consuming. I'm not sure assignment would be possible either as you can't assign a burden - and the obligation to pay what had been owed to creditors and appears lost was sure burdensome.

But, I'm not a lawyer and would welcome clarification.

mikewjones_from_wales

Rednelly wrote: »

No. It wasn't easy money. It isn't easy money. One of the reasons the administrators consented to sell the list of client details to ClearDebt was because we said we would do any debt management plans for people currently in Apex DCM debt management plans free of any fee, in perpetuity. That means doing new calculations for every debtor, getting up to date details from creditors putting together a plan, etc - plus getting in the monthly cheques and making distributions to all creditors in five days. It means reviewing clients circumstances regularly and adjusting the plans. For nothing. Zero - zip. Not even for the (roughly 10%) "fairshare" contribution CCCS get from creditors.

Yes, we get protocol-compliant fee IVAs where those are appropriate advice. But there are many, many more DMPs than there are IVAs. The administrators got a fair price. And we are proud of the job we are doing for DCM ex-clients.

when i said it was easy money, i meant the administrators not asking for more money from companies wanting to by the client base.

mikewjones_from_wales

Rednelly wrote: »

CAB are free, but often offer only advice - not implementation of a plan. CCCS are funded by creditors. Both organisations do a great job - but they admit they can only deal with around half the people who need debt advice. If CCCS recommend an IVA they get paid the same fees as most commercial providers.

I was at a Money Advice Liaison Group meeting today when someone from the non-fee charging sector was quoted as saying that debt advice in Britain would be on its knees if it wasn't for the reputable fee-charging companies.

ClearDebt advisors all have the Certificate in Debt Resolution - an advanced BTEC that takes around 210 hours study and three examinations. The advice they give is free and it is impartial. We don't need to sell a particular solution. If enough people with debt problems come to us we will keep our staff in jobs simply by giving the right advice all the time.

If someone's best bet is bankruptcy or a DRO - we tell them, even though we don't offer those solutions.

If a Debt Management Plan is right - we tell them, even though, if they are a DCM client, our plans are truly free and cost us money.

If an IVA is best - we say so, and if the client takes it up and it passes, then we make a fee - but no more and no less than any other firm that operates within the IVA protocol. And, of course, if the IVA goes the distance, then it's the creditors that pay - not the client. Yes, we hope to make a modest profit on that. ClearDebt doesn't pretend to be anything other than a commercial company. But one that does the job right.

Andrew,

You have again missed the point.

A person had concerns technically about the route not the company in question.

If you look at my post i clearly said she could get a second opinion, advice was all she was looking for. Not implemenation of any plan.

You will recall our last conversation by telephone where i said sometiimes you get what you pay for which was why i opted to pay with DCM. I dont have problems with Fee paying companies my problem is with a company that did charge but did other things DCM.

It might be good for all the debt industry to get behind media attention to denounce what DCM and their directors have done. Cleardebt have come out speaking to the media others still remain deafly silent.

But i also said the debt industry including cleardebt could do more in correcting what has happened and making sure it does not happen again in the future

Rednelly_2

mikewjones_from_wales wrote: »

Andrew,
But i also said the debt industry including cleardebt could do more in correcting what has happened and making sure it does not happen again in the future

Mike I absolutely agree with this. We will be working to try to ensure people aren't let down like this again.

mikewjones_from_wales

Rednelly wrote: »

I think it would be good if a contract/insolvency lawyer happened along and clarified this. But my understanding is that novation requires all three parties to agree - in this case the administrator, the client (ie you, Mike ) and the party taking over the cases. In these circumstances novation - even if it was a commercial option, which it wasn't, would be difficult and time consuming. I'm not sure assignment would be possible either as you can't assign a burden - and the obligation to pay what had been owed to creditors and appears lost was sure burdensome.

But, I'm not a lawyer and would welcome clarification.

In novation the contract remains the same all that changes is one of the contract parties, by the nature that the new party wants to be novated in he obvioulsy agrees and party leaving the contract is going for a particular reason. All that would be required for novation wouold be 1036 no novation agreements simple

Therefore the only party left to agree is that of the one that was originally in the contract in this case the clients of DCM.

Obviously you know novation wasnt going to work with the great big minus against the clients account. Your hardly going to novate obligations and liabilities for -£2.3 million it stands to reason. But cleardebt would have seen the records, it would be interesting what they saw that put them off buying the company as a whole.

Assignment would not work, and in any case there are no assignment rights in the DCM agreement in any case