Hello eoin8008,

The SIP rules, while pretty obscure, are well known by IP's and commercial introducers of cases.

Put simply an IP can pay for work that has been done on a case by a third party. They cannot pay for the introduction itself. Any payment should be proportionate to the work that has been done.

Upfront fees are a different issue. Introducers, provided they have a consumer credit licence, are entitled to charge their clients upfront fees. Clients can elect to pay for such a service if they wish.

It's legal and legitimate. But completely unnecessary. There simply is no need to pay any intermediary any kind of upfront fee prior to going ahead with a Trust Deed. One of the things we're proud that this site has achieved is to help a significant number of readers to avoid the expense and delay this involves.

The Protected Trust Deeds Working Group has expressed concerns about the behaviour of certain introducers, though they didn't express quite so much concern about the IP's who tolerate such behaviour by willingly accepting the introductions. Neither did they say much about the IP's who own/run separate businesses that act as fee-charging introducers.
This may have something to do with the number of IP's that sat on the Working Group!!

Anyway you do everyone a service by pointing out this issue on the forum again.
There are plenty of really good IP's and Trust Deed companies out there that do not charge upfront fees and treat people fairly. I hope readers considering signing a Trust Deed take the trouble to find them.

Hi and many thanks for your reply. I think the process deserves some constructive criticism. If I pay someone ?ú600 for a service, why on earth is it necessary to pay them twice? I cannot think of any other industry, where this would happen. I would also really like to know if agency's have the authority to;
a-Tell debtors to change bank accounts straight away. This idea is sold to the debtor as an act that will be to their advantage. Clearly, it is so there is money to pay the agency, the next time the monthly wage goes in.
b-What authority do agency's have to tell debtors to stop paying all creditors?
I have obviously checked what regulatory body they come under, there doesn't appear to be one. I did note the PTD Working Group are considering using the AIB's facilities in this respect. As a victim of a very dodgy PTD, it is more than obvious to me that the agency's and IP's are working hand-in-hand. I have to say, it appears that no-one is really interested in treating debtors fairly. Of course the agency's and IP's have always had the moral high ground, up till now. This begs the question- when was the last time someone actually made a proper complaint to a Government body about their actions ? I'll let you know the outcome[:D]

Hi eoin8008,

It is normal for debt advisers of all types to advise clients to change their bank account to a bank to whom they do not owe any money. The advice is provided where it is clear that the contractual debt repayments will not or cannot continue. That is because the banks have the right of "set-off" which, for example, means if you dont pay your credit card bill they can take it straight out of your bank account. This might leave you without money for priorities like housing, food and utility bills. This isn't a technical threat... it happens all the time when people ignore the advice.

Debt advisers often advise people to stop making debt repayments, or to reduce them to an affordable level. Generally this is to ensure you have enough money to live reasonably and do not incur further debt which it is apparent cannot be repaid. Consumer Credit Licence holders providing debt advice are instructed by the Office of Fair Trading that...

"Any advice given to the client to cancel direct debits or standing orders prior to the repayment plan being agreed with creditors must be demonstrably in the best interests of the client. It is not a step which should be undertaken lightly".

A debt advice agency should have a Consumer Credit Licence which is issued by the Office of Fair Trading. They are then subject to ongoing monitoring (and potentially sanctions) from the Office of Fair Trading if they do not meet the required standards.
Any individual or agency providing debt advice without a CCL will be trading criminally.

There are lots of people and organisations who are genuinely interested in seeing that debtors are treated fairly. These include good Trust Deed companies, good CAB and Money Advisors, good commercial debt advisers, Trade Associations such as the Debt Resolution Forum and the Debt Manager Standards Association, The Office of Fair Trading, the Accountant in Bankruptcy, Trading Standards Officers etc etc.

There are clearly some exploitative rogues working in the sector as well.

I know you feel extremely strongly about the way that you have been treated and look forward to hearing about how your complaint develops and is resolved. However I hope other readers also understand that there are many good sources of advice and help available and that then take the time and trouble required to make sure that they find them.

Hi TDA, and again many thanks for your words of wisdom. You are correct when you mention my rather strong feelings at the moment. After reading through the various SIP documents, I was rather disturbed to read that a copy of my husbands income and expenditure should have been sent to the AIB. To put you in the "know" his disposable income stated ?ú172,( income ?ú2228 minus expenditure of ?ú2056) the next page shows a new improved expenditure total of only ?ú1906!!! giving ?ú322 as the new disposable income! We actually were made to pay ?ú350 ( apparently ?ú320 wasn't enough to provide our creditors with a dividend?) Of course I have sent a letter to the AIB today, asking if they did receive my husbands income and expenditure , and enclosed a copy of the original ( just in case)
I could also point out that as there was no meeting with Invocas, there are no signatures on any of the questionnaire documents, eg. data protection doc etc.
I do appreciate that not all IP's behave in this manner, and cannot thank all the staff/helpers on this website enough. As I mentioned before, this website has given me the courage of my convictions, a true godsend. Bless you all.

Hi eoin8008

Could you keep us posted if/when you get a response.

There are a number of issues here and I am wondering how they managed to complete the Money laundering part and confirm that your ID is actually you when there was never any meeting. I assume they asked you for ID.

Mark

Hi Mark, and many thanks for your reply. We were asked to send 2 documents, one of which should be photographic. Of course I will keep you up to date with any reply I receive. However, it is my experience so far, that the final responses I am receiving bear little/no relation to the questions I have asked. At the moment the AIB have agreed to audit the account, due to our accusations/ proof of double invoicing etcet. The Financial Ombudsman have sent me their complaint form in respect of the dispute over the calculation of the equity. I've had to do a lot of digging to find out what is what so to speak, as I'm sure you'll understand, I don't deal with this type of thing everyday! My saturday night was spent reading the Insolvency Act 1986 (or finding relevant bits more like)
I've got a copy of the PTD working groups final report, so have my bedtime reading for a few nights. I understand and fully believe, that creditors should receive as much money back as possible. However, one man has been entrusted with my entire familys financial well being, and used his position and our situation to his advantage. Questions do need answering. Many, many thank yous again.

As this complaint is currently "open", for the sake of balance, and as the firm concerned have been named, I'm going to add that the firm concerned are welcome to respond/contribute to this thread and others.

They are a large and well-known Trust Deed company and, as such, are likely to appear in this forum more than other firms. All companies, no matter how good or bad, tend to have a mix of good and bad feedback from clients that have used their services.

Eoin8008, who the support team have spoken with personally, will no doubt report on the progress of the complaint which will be of great interest to many readers that have read her posts and come to understand her concerns over recent months.

As for eoin8008's choice of bedtime reading... I can personally confirm that it is a wise choice for anyone who struggles to get a good nights sleep!

At Invocas we are always happy to listen to our customers and investigate any issues that they may have. We would encourage Eoin8008 to contact us directly, if they have not already done so, and we will do our best to help. We have a duty of confidentiality to all our customers and therefore we are not able to comment further on this public forum.

Hello Invocas, and many thanks for your reply. Personally, I feel a positive step has already been achieved by your acknowledgement of the Data Protection Act. We did raise an eyebrow when you put someone else's car registration number, make and model on my husband's PTD! However, if at any time you would like to answer issues raised about yourselves on this wonderful ( free of charge!) website, I don't think there would any objections to you doing so in a hypothetical manner?