Scrappy318.

It is important to note that the rules from last year applied to new trust deeds only.

Sold down the river is correct that different rules apply on older trust deeds, of which I think yours is one?

Which is probably why ours have been sold on.

Hi Trust deed assistant,

Yes you are correct this is unpaid and we do appreciate any advice and make no demands on when any answer is forthcoming.

Although this forum is unpaid the business generated for the firms involved must have been a reasonable volume. I for one pointed a few people I know to go to PJG and that was also generated from this forum.

This forum exists to offer good advice and to a degree the experts firms will do well out of it. Unfortunately for this whole concept to work advice cannot only given when the sun is shining but also when the poo hits the fan. Many potential trust deed clients will be reading this and making their own judgements, surely its in ever ones interest to get this sorted.

Let's not kid ourselves here.
CF are a Business as are PJG.

When PJG sold a number of its TD's to CF, there had to be opportunities there for CF to gain from the Transaction.
Equity being one and, most likely, Reviews too.

CF will look to get a good return for themselves and are obliged to do the same for the Creditors.

PJG may have already accrued most of their fees, because most of the work is done up front generally. They will also be able to focus on cases which they are due better future returns and better manage their portfolio.
They, presumably, will also have received payment from CF.

The TD agreements detailed on most of our TD's are in line with PJG policy and should really have been part of the discussions if PJG endorsed CF.

PJG, in my opinion, must have known this could happen and whilst they cannot influence what decisions CF can make, they have not safeguarded us unfortunates, who were their Clients.

This topic is obviously going to be used for sharing info for those affected.

I do appreciate the forum and its contributers, both professionals and amateurs, but the silence is deafening from the pros, including PJG.

I agree, we are wasting our time trying to get answers of the "experts". Marks silence says a thousand words. We now need to restrict this post to sharing information and try and be one step ahead of creditfix. I suggest from now on we stick to the facts and if any of the 4 firms would like to offer advice that would be appreciated.

The facts.

1) PJG sold our trust deeds on to creditfix and have washed their hands off us now they have got their pounds worth.
2) AIB have suggested than any substantial changes to the trust deed is unusual.
3) Credidfix can impose any new conditions on us REGARDLESS of any previous PJG assurances etc.

First Steps,

WAIT, lets start collating information about their next steps as there is a spread of about a year in the trust deeds sold.

Inform the AIB about any changes, not sure what effect this will have.

If you can at the end of the Trust Deed get an independent valuation carried out.

Again I think we just wait, they will make their intentions clear soon enough.

The questions have been answered from my perspective Diamond Chap. The answers have not been to the liking of some people, but they are what they are.

To reiterate:

Your trustee may or may not make a decision you're uncomfortable with. We don't know what decisions they'll make. For you, for an expert poster, it's currently speculation.

If you're uncomfortable with a decision made by your trustee you'll have recourse to their own complaints process, their professional body, the AIB and/or the law.

What would the outcome be? It depends upon the precise case circumstances, the information that the trustee puts forward, and the view that the arbiter takes. Without any of those facts just now, it's speculation.

So to expect precise answers to utterly undefined speculative questions is unrealistic. The answers will come from your trustee and, in the unfortunate event that it becomes necessary, whatever relevant arbiter you approach.

And, on a practical level, I'm sure folks here will try to help in the event that there's a defined situation to address.

There isn't at the moment.

The only question that needs answering for me is how can it possibly be legal to get us to sign up to something entirely based on the written assurances we were given, and now basically be told this paperwork is useless.

Its actually starting to make me feel sick now. I think I'll just give up. I realise from reading on here I am beat.

Hi TDA, I think a lot of what is being posted is rooted in fear. Minds go into overtime and for those with home ownership the stakes are that much higher. If you have being walking a path for sometime and (it was sudden, never something I anticipated) things veer off in a new unknown direction then the questions and fears can become almost overwhelming. For me I tend to try to ignore things in the hope if goes away but of course it does not. I'll admit I came back today hoping to read of someone posting, hey it was fine, no change from the PG philosophy, discharged as expected! And of course you don't find that comfort and so the whirl goes on. Your IP is such a powerful force in your life, for those that putthought into it and researched and went where they felt safe, well it is a process, denial, anger and at some point for the state of your sanity acceptance. And you have to get there people because horrible as it is to have lost some more control of your situation, you have to be able to go on and live and if things don't work out as you hoped then you have to dig deep and and see it through. For Diamond Chap my thoughts are with you and i hope you get the discharge you are so close to.

This is starting to look very worrying.
The lack of input or clarification from either company is ridiculous, imo

I have to say I'm still very much of the don't worry until it's time to worry type. And boy is that hard to practice.

However, I find recently developments worrying.

"Please rest assured that there will be no significant changes to your Trust Deed."

That's what the letter signed off by Pearce Flynn stated.

So we now have one person whose Trust Deed stated no equity at the start. They are now being told by Creditfix that this is wrong.

I'd certainly count that as a significant change.

Let's take PJG and Creditfix out of the equation at the moment.

Has anyone ever been told during their Trust Deed that it was worked out wrong at the start?

Let's bring PJG back in.

They've been doing Trust Deeds for many years. They'd done loads. These all go through the Insolvency Exchange. Have they ever commented on this error in the past? What about creditors, the AIB, professional bodies, Audit Scotland? Have they ever suggested that this may be wrong?

I am correct in saying the new law is that equity is decided at the start of the Trust Deed? If this concept is so wrong, why is it now the law? It seems logically like the correct way of working things.

My own Trust Deed was given a going over at work by directors very high up. Every detail was questioned. I had an easier time being stripped searched when flying out of Bogota airport. That part was never queried.

As I said, I'll not worry yet, but I've spent more time on the AIB website this weekend then I have done in the last three years.

Good luck to the poster involved and all in this situation.

You are correct Bert Rudge. Under the new rules the position with equity is fixed at the start. There certainly doesn't appear to be any thought that this is an inappropriate way of going about this by those that make the rules.

I know of a case transfer where the new trustee found possible evidence of inappropriate activity regards equity at the start of the process. They considered that they had a duty to rectify this on affected cases. A new trustee does need to be satisfied that they're carrying out their work in line with their obligations, so they have to be curious about what went on before.

Satisfying that curiosity might of course take a little time, remembering each case must be judged on its own merits, so early stage written communications will naturally keep options open.

Not one comment from PG...
Here is my personal take of your company:-

...we know your reading these concerns as you have commented on plenty of other issues on here and have been pretty sharp in responding in the past before this debacle...your failure to advise is obvious...i for one am absolutely taking this further and will investigate fully this transfare proccess between both you and creditfix and will try check as much as i can that the correct trustee transfare proceedures were carried out and that you advised new clients of this during the transfare process...in fact as we speak i am drafting a recorded delivery letter to the AIB advising them of my concerns...i have loyally paid this for the past 31 months and will not allow the possibility of abuse of my situation to occur...i can only speak for myself but am sure im not the only one who is prepred to take this further should there be any change to my original agreement...

Scrappy318.

Mark's away for unexpected reasons. He hasn't posted here since Monday.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trust Deed Assistant
[br]Scrappy318.

Mark's away for unexpected reasons. He hasn't posted here since Monday.

---

So does this imply that he will now start explaining where we stand with regards to the documents his firm set up for us. Were they correctly done and if not is this why creditfix can change the equity situation/

I don't speak for Mark.

However, in what possible way would his comments on those questions help you?

As explained a few times recently, it's communication with your new trustee that will be useful to you rather than anyone at PJG.

Also nobody here has any idea to what extent anyone at that firm is at liberty to talk about issues connected to the transfer.

Frankly as well, some people posting here have been plain rude. You can't be rude to someone or about someone and then express shock when they don't give their time to you.

Mark has previously written that he's available to the team at CreditFix to clear up issues if they need that help. For anyone concerned about their situation at the moment (quite legitimately I accept) that's the most useful thing anyway.