Hello The Principal and welcome.

There is no clear law at the moment, which is at the heart of the issue why we cannot offer you (and other posters on this thread) clear information.

The law is forming as these cases take place, and the judgment referred to in this thread may be less or more relevant to you depending upon the precise contractual nature of your particular contract with your trustee.

I think you're certainly entitled to know what your trustee has received. You're also certainly entitled to ask them what they plan to do with any such payments they've received.

Regarding forcing your trustee to hand over the payment if they plan to seek reappointment - you might find that tough. Best to read through this entire thread where that subject has been covered previously.

Thank you TDA.

I appreciate your position in saying that particular contracts with Trustees may (or may not) be similar to the latest judgement. However if a Trustee and debtor are both discharged how long can a Trustee keep going with a TD if this discharge is not binding? Ad infinitum??!! All the while racking up fees in the process which eat into the recovered PPI. Indeed it is not so much this aspect it is more the scenario of a possible conclusion (or not) years beyond the discharge. It makes a nonsense of the whole process.

In regards to "forcing the Trustee to hand over payment" this judgement IMO comes down in favour of the debtor (albeit as you say there may be differing circumstances) to require the Trustee to pay such PPI monies to the (former) debtor as payments have been gathered beyond the discharge. I think if a Trustee held on to these monies in the hope of a reappointment that 1) Goes against the spirit of the ruling in favour of the debtor and 2) Just how long would the process of reappontment and pursuit take? Months? Years?

Going down route 2 brings no satisfactory conclusion to a process that is emotionally draining for the debtor. Indeed I would argue that after this judgement a (former) debtor has strong grounds to pursue a Trustee via complaining to the IPA should their member be taking that course of action, and the debtor may have an option to pursue the Trustee through the court to reclaim those PPI monies. Until the law is formed/clarified then a (former) debtor should have a reasonable route of action - the recent judgement will afford that option for many rather than a "wait and see" approach - how many (former) debtors have to wait and see - for years perhaps?!

Hi The Principal.

I can totally understand your frustration and you make a series of good points.

These points - or variants of them - have been responded to previously in this thread when raised by others, so I don't propose to repeat myself.

I do however appreciate that these previous responses may not help very much in respect of your concerns right now - but they are simply what they are in the current context and confusion.

Thank you TDA.

From what I gather, the case as Hamilton Sheriff Court (involving BDO) has been suspended pending the outcome of the Cleardebt one (which has bee appealed).

This obviously means another wait for those of us in PPI limbo, but hopefully we can see an end to the whole saga sometime relatively soon.

I've read through this thread and a couple of others again.

A lot of people on all sides are making a lot of good points about this issue.

Has anyone tried pulling those points together in a letter, and sending the letter to the trustee?

It's beyond that now Candlewick as the arguments are being heard in court.

It's a shame if a lot of energy was wasted putting questions to the forum rather than the trustees, before it all got to the courts.

Each to their own of course. Me? I'd be writing to my trustee using the arguments that suited me. Mentioning the recent judgment. Quoting the bit at the end which explains why the court decided the way it did.

If the trustee told me that they were going to hang on to the money till some other court thought about it a bit more, I'd write to them again. I'd quote the recent judgment again. I'd point out the bit at the end again.

I'd make it clear that if the other court came to the same conclusion, I'd not only be looking for my PPI money back, I'd be looking for interest plus compensation for the fact that they'd made me wait for so long to get the money which the highest court in Scotland had already said should be mine.

I'm just one of those people who thinks that it's better to vent your spleen at the person who can take the decision about giving you the money or not, rather than going on the offensive against people who are trying to help.

It's always best to put things in writing. I'm sure I've said that before on this forum. It's even better if you put it in writing to the right person.

What I mean is the people taking the decision about whose money it is are the courts, and you are absolutely correct in that a Court of Session has decided in favour of the debtor in the recent case.

It is being appealed though, and I've already written to BDO twice about my funds, and spoken to them on the 'phone, to no avail.

I'm not going to say too much because I'm just back after weeks ban.

quote:

---

Originally posted by tinsoldier
[br]What I mean is the people taking the decision about whose money it is are the courts, and you are absolutely correct in that a Court of Session has decided in favour of the debtor in the recent case.

It is being appealed though, and I've already written to BDO twice about my funds, and spoken to them on the 'phone, to no avail.

I'm not going to say too much because I'm just back after weeks ban.

---

Writing to your trustee is definitely the best way, IMO. Especially if you get them to confirm they've received the letter or email.

Even if they don't act immediately, you have set out your position - and can come back to it when the time is right.

It wasn't a ban tinsoldier. We've banned about one idiot a year since 2008.

You're clearly no idiot, but you were bloody rude to people who bear no responsibility for your predicament. You might want to consider acknowledging that.

If I'm you, I'm doing what candlewick says.

I was going to start a thread apologising TDA but then there are people on here far more worthy of attention than me.

There was no excuse for my behaviour last week and there will be no repeat.

Thank you tinsoldier.

I'm glad you've chosen to come back.

Just back on the forum after been away for a while, my how time flys, and ive got to say that looking back on previous posts about this ppi fiasco, inclusive of my own posts and opinions, i am in no way surprised about the courts decision, i said many months ago that this pursuit of ppi would come back to bite the bottom of trust deed companies and it looks like thats whats going to happen i think, many jumped on the bandwagon of holding back ppi refunds from previous trust deed debtors and are now facing, in my opinion a righteous return for their greed and failure to carry out their duties during their clients trust deed term, the only trust deed expert who agreed with me at that time was Mark, who did go into a lot of detail about the risks asscociated with such a policy, so well done to him, unfortunately for this industry i personally feel it has been damaged by a few companies jumping onto this ride, which is now breaking down at the side of the road, putting at risk a lot of jobs within this sector!!!,i did say "dont bite the hands that feed you", but unfortunately its to late i feel, who in their right mind is going to enter a trust deed now after all this comes out!!, very sad that its got to this, and very sad for the many decent folk who work within this industry, who i feel, may be very worried about keeping their job, as trust deeds become a very unpopular route when on the cusp of going down the insolvency route.

Hi littlemo.

You are of course entirely entitled to your opinion.

I'm entirely sure that people who need to find relief from unmanageable debt will continue to use protected trust deeds and sequestration (where the exact same thing has been happening).

It's simply not realistic in my view to think that people would rather put up with a life in debt rather than risk a PPI claim following their discharge being collected for the benefit of their creditors. Do you think they will?

We speak to lots of people in our industry working at different firms. We're yet to speak to a single person that thinks this issue will place their continued employment in jeopardy. Not one. Have you spoken to any who feel differently?

The courts decision is being appealed we hear. It will be very interesting to hear what the outcome is in due course.

You may well turn out to be right that the money should not have been withheld and feel vindicated if that happens. Those of us that haven't taken a side (which includes Kevin and David also as far as I can tell) but who can see that the arguments on both sides have merit will appreciate having some certainty. We'll neither feel vindicated nor wrong - just glad to know, under the law, who's due the money.

There we go - I'm entitled to my opinion as well!