IVA Companies faliure Closure Rant

Duke_of_Northumberland

Hi All
It’s been a long time since I’ve been on the forums in factJune 2008 ! Any way we entered into anIVA and with some bumps along the way we finally finished it February2012. Had the Champers and strawberriesready to go!!

With regards to the IVA itself my best advice is just keepfocused and disciplined. Always ask doI need it? No do I really need it!? Okthen if I do can I get it cheaper? Andfollowing this you shouldn’t go far wrong. It’s not been easy at all but like life you get through it and there islight at the end of the tunnel.
So now it’s nearly February 2013 and we have still yet to receiveout letter of dispensation. Ok so initiallyI was not overly bothered as I thought as and when because I didn’t see theneed to get back into the loan game. However our circumstances have changed where we would like to invest ina bigger car due to my wife expecting twins! Note (we already have 3 kids) lol.

So really last November I sent a message to the IVA companyand asked what was the delay to which I was informed that they had beenexceptionally busy and where way behind on admin. Now for the size of this IVA Company Ithought very strange but thought I’d leave it a month and again chase them.

Well I’m not a financial expert nor do I follow what goes onhowever all of a sudden we received a number of calls who initially let both mywife and me to believe that they were the company who we had out IVA with andthat they were checking our records and noticed we had PPI to claim. I simply said look we’ve been in an IVA sohow on earth could we claim for such a thing and to be honest more or less toldthem that I wasn’t interested. A fewcalls the calls increased when I simply said just sent the information and I'lllook over it.

So a few days after reading them they wanted us again tohand over financial control so they could apply for these PPIs. After phoning our IVA Company asking why theywere continuing to harass both myself and my wife they then told me that theywere working on behalf of them as they needed to collect the PPI. I deal with Management Information and mybrain screamed STOP! lol and said over my dead body will you get to me handover financial control again and that I wasn’t interested and asked why it hadtaken them so long ? Again quoted admindelays and rule changes on PPI Blah blah blah still never answering myquestion.

So basically this IVA company had passed my detail on, neverinformed me of such and lied to me about the delay ! After a very heated discussion with one ofthere customer services which was colourful to say the least. At one point I was told that I had been letoff lightly being in an IVA! Anyway (water of a ducks back ) the tacticschanged in that if i didn’t sign up with their 3rd party they would continue tohold my letter of dispensation.

So I then countered thanks to the person who won in thesmall claims court by billing the PPI legal chasers for contacting him.

I then mentioned both in communication to the customerservices and via email that if I received 1 more phone call by this 3rd partythat they would be billed £50 per minute of my time and that if they did notpay up I would happily take them to the small claims court. Needless to say that I have not received 1phone call from them. Yeh to me !

Well now I and the IVA Company are at a stalemate as I believethey will not do anything to close this IVA until I sign up. So after asking them an emailing them thesimple questions of why such a delay and when do I get my letter I now havebeen stone walled by the closure team.

Not being all quiet and accepting such I managed to get theemail of my supervisor and the CEO of the company to which I have and willcontinue to communicate to them asking them the simple questions.

As yet I have had no response ( nearly 2 weeks ) so I nowhave ramped this up a little by contacting FSA who referred me to the legal ombudsmanwho informed to ask them about making a formal complaint which I have and whichthey have 8 weeks to reply. They alsosaid to keep communications via email so I resort to sending them each week andI’m now on a count down.

I think it’s really wrong what they have done and feel it’salmost an abuse of privileged information that they use to make even moremoney. I honestly think it’s disgustingas they are only motivated by corporate greed.
I can’t see them responding so just really waiting for thebig guys to get involved. As I was told that they are aware of suchactions by IVA companies.
Sorry for the rant just really annoyed but if anything keepat them as it costs nothing to send an email!

Vikipollard

Which company was your IVA with?

Duke_of_Northumberland

Hi sorry for the delayed response but the company is Grant Thornton. It has apparently been a recent decision from the top that all IVAs now require a mandatory PPI check as I quote “we are obliged to ensure that all creditors yield the highest dividend possible” Really 6 years ?? They have still yet to answer the most basic question as to why there has been such a lengthy delay. My last payment was made the end of January 2012.

I head up a Management Information Services team and so quite frankly dispute the above quote as they are using highly valuable information that they are privy too to maximise revenue.

For example considering the very high fees charged for undertaking the IVA out of the £18,000 over £10000 of that has gone to Grant Thornton for arranging such which Grant Thornton have done very little to justify such fee.

So let’s pretend there was £1000 unclaimed which I highly doubt in PPI as they use a 3rd party disguising themselves as Grant Thornton what % goes to the 3rd for claiming such and do also what do Grant Thornton get for passing such information on ? And also then would be how much of the creditors receive? I'm sure such an answer to the above coupled with an interesting KPI 's such as % of claims through PPI before and after letter of dispensation where released or even delayed % of PPI claimed.

For me I see it as just another opportunity of Grant Thornton to further increase revenue. As I cannot see why it has taken so long to close and send out my letter. T

he fact that even I cannot even be given a timescale is also very worrying which is why the clock is ticking for them as I fundamentally believe what they are doing is wrong and an abuse of power.

I will try and keep you updated as and when things happen as I dont intend to go quitely.

UpToMyNeckInIt

Really sorry to hear about your issues with your IVA completion. (Congratulations on completing it by the way!!!).

Could have almost put money on GT being your company: Another IVA forum that I am a member of is littered with dozens of PPI issues associated with GT - most notably the investigation holding up the completion process.

Apparently, GT have 20,000-25,000 IVAs to manage, and I believe there are only about 40,000-44,000 active IVAs. (Can anyone verify: Do GT really have 50% of the IVA market? Or have I mis-read some figures?).

I suppose it’s no surprise: they have taken on IVAs from at least 2 other big firms that I have heard of.

‘Stepchange’ refer many of their IVA customers to GT as well. (Thought they were supposed to be ‘impartial’ – oh well). Wonder if any of the other debt charities operate a similar partnership.

Also heard today that debtors who approach CAB who need an IVA, get referred primarily to GT. (Again, can anyone verify this 'partnership' (for want of a better word), between CAB & GT?).

Maybe then, a lot of the angst experienced by GT customers, is a result of GT becoming a victim of their own success. That’s no excuse though. Any expanding firm must surely have to invest proportionately to meet its obligations.

I wish you well in getting a satisfactory conclusion to your IVA (I'm sure it will get there eventually), so that you can get on with rebuilding your financial life.

My advice is to let GT do the PPI thing (they will only hold everything up even more if you attempt to resist), so that you can get your completion cert. through...

Don't wait up though: Best consume the stawbs & champers anyway!!!!

cheesedoffwithdebt

HI- the issue with GT is one of aggressive and ambitious partners in what is, after all, a major accountancy practice. They have become successful but they also have very unmotivated staff, and not enough of them either. I suspect what they've done is networked with the creditors and given undertakings about how they will manage IVA's as opposed to other firms, and doing a mandatory PPI claim check, if I were a creditor I'd be very happy with that so that every last drop of money would come my way.
It strikes me that with all these companies who handle personal debts, they become successful by getting on the right side of the creditors, that's life and that's business.
The best support to anyone as an individual working their way through living with an IVA comes on this and other forums really, a sad truth but I can only imagine it's not much fun when you cannot bring the whole thing to an end quickly.
I do hope you get this resolved soon:wall:

cheesedoffwithdebt

As yet I have had no response ( nearly 2 weeks ) so I nowhave ramped this up a little by contacting FSA who referred me to the legal ombudsmanwho informed to ask them about making a formal complaint which I have and whichthey have 8 weeks to reply. They alsosaid to keep communications via email so I resort to sending them each week andI’m now on a count down.

PS totally agree- the FSA Ombudsman getting involved ought to be motivation enough- the Institute of Chartered Accountants also regulates GT you might want to rattle their cage as well while you're at it.

angiec71

I made a full and final payment to Grant Thornton which was accepted Sep 2011 after being retired from my job due to ill health. I was then given excuse that backlog due to takeover from Blair Endersby. Then delay due to a refund due to me, then vat probs, then needed proof that I needed to show that I had not recieved any monies from PPI (which I have sent them) . Now today after several emails and awaiting reply phonecalls I recieved an email telling me that delays were due to reasons previously stated and 'in addition another important matter which is having a serious impact on closure.' surprise , surprise PPI. I have waited 17 months in total and fobbed off with excuse after excuse to finally tell me that they were really just hanging on so they could cash in on PPI. 17 months is totally unacceptable and am no nearer to completion that i was Sep 2011. :mad:

Depth_Charge

UpToMyNeckInIt wrote: »

Really sorry to hear about your issues with your IVA completion. (Congratulations on completing it by the way!!!).

Could have almost put money on GT being your company: Another IVA forum that I am a member of is littered with dozens of PPI issues associated with GT - most notably the investigation holding up the completion process.

Apparently, GT have 20,000-25,000 IVAs to manage, and I believe there are only about 40,000-44,000 active IVAs. (Can anyone verify: Do GT really have 50% of the IVA market? Or have I mis-read some figures?).

I suppose it’s no surprise: they have taken on IVAs from at least 2 other big firms that I have heard of.

‘Stepchange’ refer many of their IVA customers to GT as well. (Thought they were supposed to be ‘impartial’ – oh well). Wonder if any of the other debt charities operate a similar partnership.

Also heard today that debtors who approach CAB who need an IVA, get referred primarily to GT. (Again, can anyone verify this 'partnership' (for want of a better word), between CAB & GT?).

Maybe then, a lot of the angst experienced by GT customers, is a result of GT becoming a victim of their own success. That’s no excuse though. Any expanding firm must surely have to invest proportionately to meet its obligations.

I wish you well in getting a satisfactory conclusion to your IVA (I'm sure it will get there eventually), so that you can get on with rebuilding your financial life.

My advice is to let GT do the PPI thing (they will only hold everything up even more if you attempt to resist), so that you can get your completion cert. through...

Don't wait up though: Best consume the stawbs & champers anyway!!!!

Hi

What figures have you misread?

You seem to keep mentioning problems with GT, they are not alone by the look of things as this thread seems to imply.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4403655

Also an interesting BBC Money article on PPI claims

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21244529

Extract below

A spokesman for the British Bankers' Association (BBA), which represents the major UK banks, said: "Unfortunately, the actions of some unscrupulous claims management companies who refer huge numbers of claims to the ombudsman whether there are grounds to or not mean that the system is being clogged up and that people with genuine complaints do not always get the service they deserve.

UpToMyNeckInIt

Depth_Charge wrote: »

Hi

What figures have you misread?

You seem to keep mentioning problems with GT, they are not alone by the look of things as this thread seems to imply.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4403655

I was referring to insolvency service figures re: approx. number of active IVAs.

All IPs get complaints, and it follows that GT being the biggest company are likely to get the most complaints. (Also, I am sure the majority of customers are happy).

It goes without saying, what I think GT should be doing applies to any other IVA provider - including mine.

However, google 'Grant Thornton IVA complaints', and the sheer number of recent hits speaks volumes. Substitute Grant Thornton for any other IVA firm in that search, and there are nowhere near the same numbers. Go figure.

I suspect therefore, that the GT have a greater percentage of unhappy customers, than many other providers.

You don't deny then that CAB and the debt charities, despite claims of impartiality, actually work in partnership with this company. (Not that there is anything wrong with subcontracting services, just that the consumer should have a little more choice I think).

Another (well-regarded) IP responding to a similar post of mine on another forum, wrote that GT is 'a leading player in the marketplace, with strong links to the not-for-profit sector';

and that:

'No-one who is referred to GT by the CAB or Step-Change Charity is obliged to use their services. Clients are free to select whoever they want to represent them in an IVA at the end of the day - although it is possible that some of the bad comments around at the moment may influence anyone doing their own research.'

In my view, it just seems to make a mockery of the advice to approach the 'impartial' debt charities if considering an IVA, when they ultimately use one private firm (especially as I thought Stepchange ran their own IVA). More worryingly, the CAB (an otherwise excellent organisation in my experience), seems to be in on the act as well.

Maybe such influential organisations should, if they think an IVA is right for a given customer, offer a choice of providers, from which the customer can make an informed decision.

Just an opinion.

Depth_Charge

UpToMyNeckInIt wrote: »

I was referring to insolvency service figures re: approx. number of active IVAs.

All IPs get complaints, and it follows that GT being the biggest company are likely to get the most complaints. (Also, I am sure the majority of customers are happy).

It goes without saying, what I think GT should be doing applies to any other IVA provider - including mine.

However, google 'Grant Thornton IVA complaints', and the sheer number of recent hits speaks volumes. Substitute Grant Thornton for any other IVA firm in that search, and there are nowhere near the same numbers. Go figure.

I suspect therefore, that the GT have a greater percentage of unhappy customers, than many other providers.

You don't deny then that CAB and the debt charities, despite claims of impartiality, actually work in partnership with this company. (Not that there is anything wrong with subcontracting services, just that the consumer should have a little more choice I think).

Another (well-regarded) IP responding to a similar post of mine on another forum, wrote that GT is 'a leading player in the marketplace, with strong links to the not-for-profit sector';

and that:

'No-one who is referred to GT by the CAB or Step-Change Charity is obliged to use their services. Clients are free to select whoever they want to represent them in an IVA at the end of the day - although it is possible that some of the bad comments around at the moment may influence anyone doing their own research.'

In my view, it just seems to make a mockery of the advice to approach the 'impartial' debt charities if considering an IVA, when they ultimately use one private firm (especially as I thought Stepchange ran their own IVA). More worryingly, the CAB (an otherwise excellent organisation in my experience), seems to be in on the act as well.

Maybe such influential organisations should, if they think an IVA is right for a given customer, offer a choice of providers, from which the customer can make an informed decision.

Just an opinion.

Hi

I am afraid to say that I cannot argue with you too much on the IVA company referrals from certain charities including the CAB and I would be foolish to try as it would be relatively easy for you and others to shoot me down in flames.

I am pretty confident that you already know my position on this.

I have always advocated choice on here and elswhere.

Cosy consensus will get us nowhere as is now proving to be the case here and there in the current economic and funding climate.

Not all CAB branches are the same by the way.

Hope you and some of the other forum members find this a fair answer

My opinions

UpToMyNeckInIt

Depth_Charge wrote: »

Hi

I am afraid to say that I cannot argue with you too much on the IVA company referrals from certain charities including the CAB and I would be foolish to try as it would be relatively easy for you and others to shoot me down in flames.

I am pretty confident that you already know my position on this.

I have always advocated choice on here and elswhere.

Cosy consensus will get us nowhere as is now proving to be the case here and there in the current economic and funding climate.

Not all CAB branches are the same by the way.

Hope you and some of the other forum members find this a fair answer

My opinions

A very fair response, and cannot disagree with you on these last points.