You may well be right on your first point, but I'm not sure I agree with you on the second, tinsoldier.

The person is never put back into a trust deed, it is only the trustee who is reappointed, and only to deal with an asset that was in existence but not known of at the time of the trust deed.

Hello tinsoldier.

It would be interesting to know - and very interesting if a member of this forum decided to do that and told us how they got on.

In terms of a finishing line I tend to disagree with you. To me there is a clear finishing line - when discharge is received.

This may come with a proviso for a relatively limited number of people and over a fairly short timescale while the whole rotten PPI mis-selling issue is brought to a close.

However a person entering into a trust deed either in the past or today doesn't stand to give up anything in the future that they haven't agreed to give up when they sign.

To repeat what I've written before though - if I'd been discharged and had a PPI payment taken from me later I doubt it would feel fair at all. There again, had I been a creditor who'd written off money owed to me, I'd be outraged if the cash that should have come to me before didn't come to me now.

Fair enough TDA - I know you are trying to see both sides.

I was discharged in September 2011 though - I'd hardly call December 2015 a fairly small timescale. Perhaps everything will come out in the wash should someone object.

Anyway, Merry Christmas to all - it's been an interesting year.

Hi tinsoldier.

I don't think I explained that point fully. What I meant by a short timescale is that the wider PPI issue is progressing quite quickly towards being history.

I think the regulatory proposal is to "close the door" on new claims from early 2018.

Happy Christmas to you as well.

Hi all,
I said I would update you all and my trustee has said that they have no interest in my ppi and the bank has sent the money to me which I received today so all good.
I have however seen some threads on here saying that their trustee is keeping the ppi, seems a little strange that there is one rule for one and one rule for another!

I'm glad to hear that you've had a positive resolution sam21. Thanks for sharing it.

Perhaps the issue is more that there are no rules on this emerging subject at all - which explains why the court has to become involved.

Hi sam21,

A great result for you regarding the PPI funds. Thanks for updating us.

At the moment there is no clear guidance regarding a Trustee being reappointed in a Trust Deed to deal with PPI funds so a small proportion of Trustees are applying to court to be reappointed.

My firm at the moment are not trying to recover PPI funds if we have been discharged in a Trust Deed but as the situation develops and clear guidance is set out from a sheriff regarding the matter this may well change.

Enjoy the extra funds, I'm sure at this time of year they will come in handy.

Wish I had used your firm then David!

You might be able to answer, but the chap I spoke to from BDO last week said I was as well not bothering to object to their potential reappointment as every one so far has been approved by a judge.

Is this true?

Hi tinsoldier,

I think as it stands a sheriff hasn't rejected the application from a Trustee to be reappointed to a Trust Deed so I suppose going by that BDO are correct. From what I understand however no one has looked to defend or counter argue this before a sheriff yet which I think is why they have all been successful.

I'm told that there needs to be a legal debate before a sheriff for this to be properly tested and only then will we know how things stand.

For anyone that is affected by this with a large amount of money on the line I think it would be best to take advice from a solicitor with a specialism dealing with Insolvency related matters and for them to be represented by them.

It could be the different between receiving thousands of pounds or not.

The only issue could be the potential legal costs of this type of advice and representation for the individual.

Thanks David

My claims management firm are going to argue my case for me as they stand to lose 30% of 17,500.....

That's chunk of money they stand to lose so can see why they want to argue your case. Having proper representation in a situation like this will give you a fighting chance.

I'm keen to see how this plays out for you and I'm sure others are. It could be that your case is one of the test ones that are properly argued before a sheriff and set a precedent.

I read somewhere that there had been arguments heard on this subject in the Court of Session and that we should hopefully get a judgement soon. However, I'm not sure if this is true or not - a quick Google search didn't really pay any dividends for me anyway!

Pay any dividends.......pardon the pun?!

Only kidding Kevin!

Kevin was asking for that one tinsoldier!

I found this the other day, the latest Scottish parliament bill:

192. New provisions in the Bill allow AiB to reappoint the previous trustee in a bankruptcy
where, within 5 years of the date of sequestration, assets are identified that would have vested in
the trustee.