TDA is correct and candlewick has offered some good advice. I am now waiting to see what happens now.

The sad thing is this whole debacle could be avoided if the guy who signed us up had the common decency to come on and at least speak to us. To add injury to insult he is still on here touting for business while the car wreck he leaves behind is still getting scraped off the road. He had plenty to say for himself when he was signing us up. That is my last word on this situation until things progress.

Can you enlighten me why that that wouldn't happen? I'd rather that happened than a valuation of my property be carried out for equity purposes. So how can a major thing like that be potentially ignored from the original agreement yet you think other things cannot?

Also you are asking for details of people who have been told their original agreements are not being honoured. There will not be many of these people around yet as it has only happened recently. We are concerned as we would like to know our rights and know where we stand when the time comes in a few months. Rather than just sit and wait for it to happen and then have to try and fight it, I would rather it was dealt with just now so we all get treated fairly and our originally agreements kept.

But that's just plain incorrect Sold down the river.

The information you need is from your new trustee.

TDA, I do not pay you, so I do not expect you to answer my questions so if you don't want to then that's fine. Obviously none of the other experts appear to want to answer about it either. I'm sure we will all get bored eventually and move on when we get nowhere here then it will return to a joyful place of people thanking their Trustees etc and explaining how it was just 36 payments as they had been told and that trust deeds are wonderful

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trust Deed Assistant
[br]By the way... I'd really strongly recommend people read the good sense that Candlewick has been writing.

Maybe even respond.

---

Thanks, TDA - but no thanks!

I'm quite happy to reply when I can. However, once people have bounded down a path which goes:

- the new trustee hasn't looked at my case yet
- the new trustee hasn't said that everything is OK
- something's wrong with my case!
- they're going to ignore all the agreements!
- they're going to make me pay thousands more in equity!
- the agreement wasn't worth the paper it was written on!
- no agreement is worth the paper it's written on!
- let's tell everyone on the internet that my agreement isn't valid; no agreement is valid; they're all worthless!!!!!!

Once people have got themselves into that mindset, it's very difficult to get them back out of it.

Especially when they surround themselves with a group of likeminded people, and they all spend time reinforcing each others fears.

I simply hope that others aren't being infected by those - so far unfounded - fears, simply because they are being expressed with such vehemence and passion.

its called decency.

That's simple in terms of your rights steve1984, and has been stated here a number of times.

In the event that your trustee made a decision you wanted to dispute you could do so through any combination of the following:

1: His own firm's complaints process.
2: The regulatory body of which he's a member.
3: The AIB.
4: The law.

In each instance the trustee would have to explain why their case outweighs yours.

Hopefully of course the need will not arise.

it's also very easy to dispel these thoughts and fears through a straight answer..............

Candlewick,

You seem to be ignoring the fact that they are ALREADY changing one members so they are looking at this, thats not what we signed up to. Yes its only one case but their mindset is clear and its just a matter of time before that number increases.

Secondly, there is also a very active debate on the IVA forum as well. PJG also sold out on thousands of IVA's. And guess what surprise surprise they are now receiving their letters with the "new" terms. If its any consolation they are also getting ignored by a very active PJG member called mel who has also vanished off the face of the earth. So excuse me if I'm trying to cover any eventuality.

The fact that PJG cannot even come on here and confirm the legality of their documents is completely unbelievable.

Let's just point out as well that lots of people come on here regarding situations where they are in dispute with their trustee.

The answers provided typically focus on how to try to resolve it with the trustee, or where the poster can go to have someone more independent intervene if agreement cannot be reached with the trustee.

This has always been the case, because it's useful for the poster.

So, if anyone reading this finds themselves in this situation in the future, that's what we'll do just as we always have done.

There's no preventative magic bullet here. It doesn't exist. There's no cleverly worded question that can enable me or anyone else to produce something that doesn't exist.

I wish that there was so that I could enjoy a nice quiet weekend where occasionally someone agrees with me and nobody is rude. More importantly, I wish I could do it to alleviate the worry of anyone who is concerned. But I can't.

It's not unbelievable Sold down the river.

It has been explained to you. They can't do that. It's not in their gift. Please read Bert Rudge's post again if you want to disregard what I've written.

TDA you really have been patient and restrained and that is testament to your professionalism. And you are right I think we should now just sit back and deal with this on a case to case basis. We all know roughly where we stand so let's just sit this one out.

Ok I agree with you, you can't alleviate the worry. Have a nice weekend.

PS - no one expects you to alleviate worry, And we do appreciate you taking to the time to answer. Hopefully some other expert will take a turn at answering and give you a break.

Hi candlewick.

I meant respond in terms of acknowledging the sensible points you've made. Thank you for making them.

I didn't expect to pass the baton to you altogether. Unless you're offering for an hour or two?!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sold down the river
[br]TDA is correct and candlewick has offered some good advice. I am now waiting to see what happens now.

The sad thing is this whole debacle could be avoided if the guy who signed us up had the common decency to come on and at least speak to us. To add injury to insult he is still on here touting for business while the car wreck he leaves behind is still getting scraped off the road. He had plenty to say for himself when he was signing us up. That is my last word on this situation until things progress.

---

I have been increasingly frustrated by some of the things said about this issue.

The above, in my view, oversteps any boundaries of common decency. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you said it out of ignorance and frustration, rather than malice.

I'll also assume that you don't share my sense of foreboding whenever I hear the phrase "x has been called away unexpectedly". In my experience, it usually means there has been bad news.

Obviously, I hope very, very much that I am wrong on that point.

If I am correct, then even if Mark COULD comment on the forum (I'm fed up repeating that I don't think he could!) then this might not be the right time.