I'm pretty cynical about many areas of the trust deed 'industry' myself.

However, unless your friend actually puts any of these questions to the trustee - in writing - and gets back a response - in writing - there's no way of saying what to do next.

If the trustee says 'Oh, fair point - as you were', then it's all sorted.

If the trustee says something else, you can tell us what that 'something else' is, and we might be able to suggest how to challenge/complain/appeal etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indentured Servant

Sorry but that's another obfuscation, regulated and inspect by whom, the AIB?, their advice is to contact the trustee so back to square one.

Yet again it is mentioned that the decisions can be challenged but I still don't know where they can be challenged or who to contact. I do respect that trust deeds may well have a place in insolvency law, however it still doesn't seem to me that the regulations in place do anything to help the debtor and instead place their entire trust in the actions of the trustee who has a financial interest in extending the trust deed for as long as possible.

---

IS, there is one common theme in all the replies on this thread - your friend has to go back to the trustee to get all the details
(in writing, for preference).

It appears that the AiB have said the same thing.

So, has your friend gone back to the trustee? Has he/she asked the trustee to explain all of the requests/demands you have detailed on this thread? If so, what was the trustee's answer?

If not, that's what your friend has to do now.

Until we know why the trustee believes there are arrears, or anything else that you have said in your posts, there is no way that any of us can assess whether or not there may be grounds for complaint or challenge. Much less can we say where that complaint or challenge should be directed.

That's not'obfuscation'. It's a recognition of the situation as it stands at the moment.

Hi Indentured Servant.

Several people have taken time to answer your questions. You don't seem to like the answers much.

You've expressed a lot of opinions, but working to get some facts is likely to serve you better.

There's also a "tone" to some of your replies which seems to be an unfortunate response to people taking time out of their working day or personal time in the evening to try to assist.

If we haven't helped you I'm sorry. I hope you get everything worked out.

Thank you!

I realise I'm ranting slightly but my friend is very upset by all of this and while they admit they were foolish and it is right that recompense is made where possible, they cannot spend the next 6 years having their financial affairs managed by persons who's interests are not aligned with theirs and are in fact contrary.

My concern is that all of the talk of challenging decisions etc. seems quite vague, why are there no clearly defined processes to be followed and why always must the debtor go through the trustee in the event of a complaint?

PS: at least someone understands that irony isn't referring to ferrous metal 🙂

You're right to an extent IS.

Your friend appointed the trustee to recover, according to the rules of the trust deed that your friend signed, as much as they reasonably can for the creditors.

Their role isn't to have interests aligned with the interests of your friend. They have duties also to the creditors and their regulators.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indentured Servant

why are there no clearly defined processes to be followed and why always must the debtor go through the trustee in the event of a complaint?

---

There is a clearly defined complaints process.

It starts with identifying whether or not there are grounds for a complaint.

Then the first step is to raise the complaint with the person/organisation you are complaining about.

After that, if you're not satisfied with the answer, you take it to the next level.

In this case, it starts with your friend talking to/complaining to the trustee.

Until that happens, there's not really a lot else that anyone can say.