Hi gresgow.

You'd normally need to pay all of your disposable income into a trust deed. Therefore, while regular contributions continue, it would normally be viewed that an extra contribution for equity would be impossible (unless paid by someone else).

I'm sure the financial adviser suggestion is to take a look at remortgaging the required funds from your home. Is there any harm in looking at this? It could give you an exit from the trust deed?

If you are paying the creditors in full and with interest, why is equity an issue?

There is an inheritance of an asset Jinty that has made full repayment necessary.

The issue is how to realise sufficient value to do that.

I don't undersatand why he is saying that he is not allowed to pay "contribution and equity at the same time"

Surely if he is paying the first in full, with interest then there is no equity to pay them?

Or am I missing something obvious here?

I would have thought he realises the equity in whatever the asset is, then uses this fulfill his obligations to the creditors and his trustee.

I had also raised the possibility of keeping my contributions at the current level (as my first proposal had been rejected)and putting aside the extra monies that I had wanted to pay and using this money to pay a lump sum at the end of the trust deed period to repay everything in full.

This proposal was also rejected.

Give us your proposals to repay debts and we will reject them.

This would appear to be the line taken by Wilson Andrews.

Hi gresgow.

According to your proposals how long would your trust deed need to be extended by to deal with the asset?

Thanks Mark

To be honest this is not the first time that I have been given information by Wilson Andrews which has been nonsence.

I have requested a meeting with my trustee, not my Relationship Manager to get some things clarified as I want to make sure that things are not being lost in translation between my Trustee and my Relationship Manager.

Can I just clarify then?, the stance taken by my Trustee is particular to WA and not industry standard.

Is the confusion that there is sufficient equity in an asset to all creditors to be paid in full, but you have instead proposed to make monthly contributions over a longer period to avoid disposing of the assets? If this is the case then the Trustee may prefer to rely on the asset to pay creditors in a more timely fashion.

I am not sure about the timescales involved TDA, I had advised in a previous posst that I was advised that the most that my TD could be extended to was 5 years.

I had been given figures required to repay debts in full, but I have now been told that these figures were based upon debts being repaid in full by a certain date. (not sure of the date) I have now been told that if I was to extend my TD further obviously increased fees and interest would be incurred

Rob

This is undoubetedly the case. I have always stated my desire to avoid having to sell the house if possible and my Relationship Manager had stated that this would only be done as a last resort.

It would appear though that with each proposal that I suggest being rejected and the likelyhood of remortgaging very slim, the sale of of house is the direction that I am being steered in.

How long would it take you to pay everything in full, based on your proposals, gresgow?

Based on current figures.

I thought so. It is a very unfortunate case. In that you have provided a proposal that would allow creditors to be paid in full plus interest. However, the Trustee has to work in the best interest of the creditors and and realise the cash as quickly as possible. However, they also have a duty of care to yourself. The Trustee may be concerned that extending the Trust Deed to allow you to make monthly contributions in leui of equity may fail if you stop making contributions years down the line meaning that they would have to sell the property anyway, losing years.

I would suggest putting your proposal to creditors, and letting them decide. At the end of the day it is them who will have to wait on their cash and if they are happy to do so then there is no problem! That way the Trustee is being completely transparent to all involved

It must also be noted that the contribution route may cost you more. With he longer the duration, the greater interest required and in turn the greater the figure from you. The selling option may be more economically beneficial to you. However, a property is of course very sentimental. So many factors to consider.

I think, giving full payment, that balance applied. I think the trustee needs to be mindful of the time period, but also of the circumstances. Initially it was ?p in the £ then it was full payment. So some balance should apply. I'm sure in the old days there was that old thing about acting for the creditors, but having a a residual obligation to the debtor. Same rules apply apparently.

Mark