That's good they are being nice and helpful.

Although I dont think I could cope with that conversation about them looking into the equity. I think I would throw the phone off a wall.

It's just a waiting game, we should know the answer in the next few weeks. Over on the other forum there is mounting anger at PJG and with creditfix's incompetence.

It looks like they have never experienced having to deal with savvy people. That guy Greg has ran a mile and has not been seen for days. This really cannot be doing any firm involved any favours who in their right mind now with all this plastered over the internet would go with either firm !!

I'm more disappointed in the fact there was obviously no safeguarding provision agreed between the two Companies during the acquisition - something similar to a TUPE agreement in employment terms I'm thinking about. Someone somewhere has made money from this acquisition/sale that's obvious, but it's just so unfair that through no fault of our own we are facing this dilema! Yet again I've had sleepless nights and a ruined weekend awaiting a response. It's also gobsmacking to me that a representative from one of the organisations we are talking about is advising people that "having a definite start and end date is key" - what a slap in the face I felt when I read that!!!!

The fact that PJG is still trading and going about business as usual is what's sticking in most peoples throat.

I know I wouldn't welcome the uncertainty that has been created by this transfer if I were personally affected as you are. I can understand the worry and frustration.

I know for a fact however that the selling firm took an interest in how their clients would be treated by the purchasing firm. It was no surprise to me that the trustee of the new firm went out of his way to come on here to say that they'd honour agreements previously made.

And you know... nobody here has yet reported an outcome to the contrary of that.

So maybe some people might be a bit more measured in what they write, if only to avoid alarming others who are similarly affected and reading this?

Thanks TDA. I'm not trying to deliberately alarm anyone - sorry if it appears that way. However, I've been told in writing that my case is at the closure stage and Creditfix are 'accessing equity levels' - that is a true fact. If indeed they are looking at honouring previous arrangements, why would they need to look at equity?

I'm sorry, but I take no comfort in your statement that the selling firm took an interest in how clients would be treated by the purchasing firm. It's easy to take an interest, a different matter altogether in ensuring that their clients agreed TD terms and conditions are met.

That's exactly what the purchasing firm's trustee came on here and said he'd do Mary.

Unless and until the opposite happens in reality, I think we'd all agree that was a positive sign?

Tda, just looking into the equity is the issue irrespective of the final outcome! We have it in writing equity is dealt with at the start and no future interest in it!!!!

Anyway as a side point, what was the point of that credit fix guy making a post the other week? Are you sure he is actually from creftfix tda? Seems like a joker

We verified that the poster was genuine.

Surely the outcome is a bigger issue than the process?

Yes, thanks TDA, I understood what Chris Parry said they would do but not once have I been told by Creditfix that they are honouring my previous agreement which was that I had negative equity and no further evaluation would be done.

Why are Creditfix telling me now they are 'accessing equity levels' when my previous agreement said no further evaluation would be done? Sorry but this doesn't give me the indication that my previous arrangement is going to stand - surely they could just say that!

Telling me that my previous arrangement still stands and 'accessing equity levels' are two entirely different things in my mind,

I may still be told that there is no equity to be dealt with but the fact that they have looked into this in the first place is the issue here. That's not honouring previous arrangements!

Could be semantics?

Part of looking into the equity being establishing what the equity set-up was at the start?

Yes, you are right TDA - the outcome is what matters here. I will update when my situation becomes clearer and has been confirmed one way or another. Sorry for ranting!

I'm with TDA on this one, we need to wait they might just be going through the motions and have no intention of changing the equity. I honestly think if they did try they would have some fight on their hands, that if it ended up in court would not end well for either creditfix or PJG.

For there to be no issue the conversation should go....

Client "ok so is that me finished my trust deed now?"

Creditfix " not yet we need to assess the equity and possibly carry out valuations etc"

Client " but I have it writing there is no equity and that was to be the end of that aspect of it, never to be mentioned again"

Creditfix " ah I see ok no problem thats how it will be dealt with. Rest easy my friend"

Not hard is it.