Full and Final/ Partial Whatever!?

System

CCCS offer a free full and final settlements service to CCCS clients. We have a dedicated team that assist clients with lump sums available to make offers of settlement on outstanding unsecured debts. This would be only be recommended after a full counselling appointment where all other options have been explored too.

The team negotiate directly with the client’s creditors for a reduced payment. This shouldn’t be confused with an IVA or a lump sum IVA.

We can’t comment on what creditors will or will not accept as a full and final settlement as this is entirely up to the creditors themselves.

eyeopener2

The constant slagging off and misinformation on CCCS is what gets my goat Mr Gimp.

Time and time again you say that CCCS is not free, but it is to the debtor. An IP is expensive, very expensive.

The OP could negotiate low full and finals, many on this board have.

CCCS will give him the initial support to start making some decisions on what is best for him. Maybe an expensive IVA is the way forward (why are they so expensive by the way?), maybe a simple DMP is the way forward or even the nuclear option of bankruptcy.

What you do in your many anti CCCS posts is give the impression that part of your DMP payment is taken in commission, it is not. 100% of what you pay goes on debt repayment. Why do you infer that CCCS take commission?

I would have thought that if your so keen to help debtors out of misery then you would campaign for IP fees to be drastically cut. Charging £00's instead of £000's would be a start.

I will say again, i'm more than happy with the way CCCS have looked after me, I may have the odd moan but overall i'm pleased. They were there when I needed them.

Have a nice day

E2

*EDIT - although I have to say your response on another thread regarding the food budget was incredibly well reasoned. Sometimes we can cut to far, god knows I have in the past, and it can be a danger. So maybe i've misunderstood your intentions. However I stand by my support of CCCS and DMPs in general.

bargainbetty

Gimpsdad wrote: »

Believe what you like. When I buy something, I do rather prefer to know what it actually costs. Using CCCS or Payplan costs the debtor nothing. It might costs the creditors who pay into the pot for it, but that's not your concern. The service is free to you.

The OP made the point that he didn't want fees charged by an IP as he felt it would dilute his lump sum. Which is fair - most fee-paying companies will take a large chunk of whatever they can get.

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, and you do people no favours by pretending that CCCS can guarantee him a better deal than he has now. We are not pretending that - we are suggesting he contacts them for help and impartial advice. YOU do him no favours by implying that a fee-paying agency could improve matters either.

What rubbish, and not one of you has given any indication as to why the original poster should not speak to who he likes, CCCS will NOT be able to negotiate £34k down to £10k on a DMP. End of. Neither will a fee-paying agency. For the record, no-one can or should guarantee anything, fee-paying or charity, because the decision rests with the lender. The lender can accept reduced payments, a lump sum, write it off or bankrupt him. He can indeed speak to who he likes. However, many people on here will advise that he speak to someone who doesn't have a vested interest in getting money out of him for thier own benefit. It is entirely his choice if he wishes to pay someone to do it, or have it done for free, or do it himself.

Time some of you started thinking for yourselves. Plenty of people here do, and just because they don't agree with you doesn't make their views any less valid than yours.

OP, you might find that because you haven't defaulted or missed payments until now, no one is willing to take a F&F at this stage. The usual advice on here is to write to all your creditors explaining that your circumstances have changed, and that you can afford to pay no more than £1 per month until further notice. Include the £1. Ask that they freeze the interest payments until further notice, as you will be unable to pay it off should they continue to add it.

Note that all communication must be in writing, and that you will not accept telephone calls relating to the matter. Insist that your telephone number be removed from the records. Cancel all your standing orders, and sit tight, paying the £1 per month. You'll get transferred to Debt Collection Agencies sooner rather than later, and then you can haggle payments with them. Remember to say that you have been offered a sum towards F&Fs, not that you already have it.

Talk to who you please, listen to lots of people but take their advice lightly (including mine, if you wish), and remember, if it sounds too good to be true then it probably is. I wish you luck x

Gimpsdad

Progress, of sorts. The personal abuse seems to have gone, for now.

For bargainbetty, CCCS don't charge the debtor that is true. Neither do Payplan, but whilst Payplan operate in a similar manner, they are not a charity, they are commercial and make millions in profit for their shareholders. To suggest that it is of no concern what they are paid for the job is a little naive, as clearly it does matter, one way or another.

I posted earlier that an IP will take a fee, but it will be detailed in advance, and if you get the deal you want it is of little matter whether, for a £14k lump, they take £1k or £13k out of the pot, as you will have the result. To be fair, you may get the same deal in other ways, and other providers than an IP, occasionally even yourself, but my point was always about transparency, and still is. Is it unreasonable to ask what commission someone gets for the deal?

I never suggested that fee payers can do a better job, that is for the OP to find out. What I did suggest is that different viewpoints are taken. I see little wrong in that.

CCCS get paid by creditors for DMP's, so it is a little myopic to suggest that there is no financial interest, plainly there is.

For eyeopener, I have said on many threads that DMP's have a place in the debt solution spectrum, and if it is an appropriate solution then CCCS is a good place to go. I do not constantly slag off CCCS, nor indulge in misinformation. If you feel that asking legitimate questions does that then I am sorry. It won't stop me asking them though.

For clarity, I have never said that CCCS take a commission from payment, they don't and I am happy to set the record straight if you feel that I didn't make that clear. They do get a commission from the back end though. Consider a full repayment plan through CCCS. A debtor will pay back 100% of the debt (leaving all other considerations aside for a moment) but, if CCCS get a commission of 15% then creditors will achieve a nett return of 85%. It isn't the greatest leap of faith to imagine that creditors, such is their wont, will look to recoup their losses somehow. This may be in the form of not freezing interest and charges for example. It may not of course, but then again who can tell. Compare that to a self administered DMP, where a debtor will pay back, in the same example, 100% of the debt, and creditors will get a return of 100%. I am sure that you will agree that such action is not for everyone, but it is surely worthy of debate to ask why CCCS are so keen on DMP's.

CCCS main source of enquiries come, directly or indirectly, from creditors themselves. There are many 10's of 1000s each month. DMP's SHOULD be a significant, but minority, part of all debt solutions. There are others, IVA, DRO, BR, PTD, LILA, DAS, Sequestration, Admin Order etc. Sometimes clever consolidation, whether unsecured or secured, can work (not often, they are dangerous).

Consider an Admin Order, almost obsolete, but still there. A court will make an order and look after the debts. It will charge a fee for doing so. Are we suggesting that HMCS are money grabbers? Of course not, but they do disclose costs. Why, if a court can do it, is it so hard to get an answer from CCCS as to full financial disclosure? They are a charity, so it shouldn't be too difficult to answer, and it isn't an unreasonable question to ask. Why have they only got one IP? Again, not an unreasonable question.

Why do you think IVA's are expensive BTW? Who told you that? Expensive compared to? CCCS are commercial for IVA's, they make a very handsome profit. Are they cheaper than any other IP? No. I have said before, and will again, that where there is a choice and no repercussions, then BR is cheaper than IVA, so in that respect they are expensive, granted, but in the same instance, an IVA would be far cheaper than a DMP. To be fair, you should make that point rather than generalising that IVA's are an expensive product. Perversely, creditors have already driven down fees on an IVA to rock bottom, which will only end up, eventually in more people going BR. Are creditors trying to limit choice to DMP's by driving out reputable providers? Very possibly, but if the rise in BR's for people who may previously have had access to IVA's continues, then creditors will get a lesser return, which will be bad for us all as they will look to recoup those costs somehow.

To re-iterate again, I am NOT anti DMP, nor anti CCCS, but I am anti bad debt solutions, and DMP's should only ever be entered into if it is clearly the right and appropriate solution. The danger with them is that you do trust to luck, whereas with other solutions, and not just IVA, you do get legal guarantees. To encourage people to take different opinions, and not rely on a machine or having 1 conversation only before making an instant decision on a DMP, is in no way the wrong thing to do. I do apologise if I occasionally come across as aggressive, but I won't apologise for asking what I consider to be questions that need answering.

fantacee

but I am anti bad debt solutions, and DMP's should only ever be entered into if it is clearly the right and appropriate solution. The danger with them is that you do trust to luck,

this is not a danger, it is sometimes the only soution.. I do enjoy reading all the POV's but for instance just this year - AGAIN! - I'm trying to check out the double speak and legalese.. and yet again a DMP (though I'm scottish and it turns out a DPP may be better, unless you want to found on a very public register!!) is my only option, too much equity apparently, which is great on paper but i've no desire to sell my home, it's not my fault I made the right decisions up until things went pear shaped!!

So gimpsdad, please don't stop what you are doing, yes I realise that PayPlan, CCCS are probably keeping most of my payment for themselves, but it looks free to us and the creditors deduct the "full" amount sent off our statement.. but also I do know that any F&F is best made by myself.. at the end, meanwhile the IP of my choice can make whatever they are making.. and no I don't feel that they should make full disclosure, no other business does.. why should they?

thank you all..

my 2cents... you have to realise that time makes a diffference, do what ever works for you when it first hits, but don't sweep it under the carpet for always.. there's always something proactive that can be done as time, experience and other opinions add to your knowledge

coolcait

fantacee wrote: »

... and yet again a DMP (though I'm scottish and it turns out a DPP may be better, unless you want to found on a very public register!!) ...

It IS a public register - yet it's unlikely that someone would accidentally find out that you were on it.

They'd have to know where to find access to the Register, and they'd have to know your name, so that they could search for you. They'd need your full surname, and at least the first initial of your first name. And then they'd need to actively search for you...

A DPP isn't for everyone - but it does have legal standing, which a DMP doesn't have:

- creditors can't change their minds, or withdraw from the DPP after 6 months or a year, or whenever it suits them. Once it's approved, they're in it for the duration;

- they have to freeze interets, fees and charges while the DPP is running, and write them off when the DPP is completed (a creditor may do this voluntarily in a DPP, but they can change their mind)

- creditors can't take any kind of legal action against you while you're in a DPP. They can't petition for your sequestration

fantacee

yes I know they are not going to 2 "accidentally" find me . but because I now have frozen int/chgs stuff going on already via a DMP which was the only solution to me at the time. I can't quite see the point of moving yet (would be defo going that route if I was just starting out though).. the reason being that my hubby is self-employed, and their business offers credit accounts (or used to!!) .. now that DAS register is definitely worth knowing about from their/our business point of view.. but at the same time I've no desire to be on it .. it's always pros and cons, knowledge etc.. IMHO anyway

coolcait

fantacee wrote: »

yes I know they are not going to 2 "accidentally" find me . but because I now have frozen int/chgs stuff going on already via a DMP which was the only solution to me at the time. I can't quite see the point of moving yet (would be defo going that route if I was just starting out though).. the reason being that my hubby is self-employed, and their business offers credit accounts (or used to!!) .. now that DAS register is definitely worth knowing about from their/our business point of view.. but at the same time I've no desire to be on it .. it's always pros and cons, knowledge etc.. IMHO anyway

I'm not sure that I've completely understood your post, so apologies if I've got this wrong

But, it seems that you've found the right solution for you.

That's the best outcome that anyone can ever wish for. :T

Gimpsdad

I DO agree that sometimes they are the only thing that can possibly be done, and where that is the case then they should be entered into, as I said. Even where there is a choice, and someone chooses DMP over other options then that is fine as they have made their own mind up. The issue for me on that is that other options are very much "glossed over" and instant decisions have been made without a full disclosure of all pros and cons.

"Marry in haste repent at leisure" may be a good analogy, I suppose the point is that all people with debt problems, regardless of who they get advice from, free, commercial, forum or man down the pub, would be well advised to consider very carefully, and for a decent period (at least a week or two) before they make any choice at all. It is the debtor that will have to live with the consequences, those giving the advice may not have to live with the consequences if that choice turns out to be rushed and ill informed.