Hello littlemo.

I think we've discussed this before, but for the interest of other readers there's an alternative viewpoint to your own. It's summarised at:

(Link removed 2020).

Thanks TDA ive just read the article, and i must say i havent changed my viewpoint in the slightest, a trustee and or their firm is very well paid to administer a Trust Deed,the fact that they have totally failed in their duties to investigate all matters relating to the financial affairs of their clients is their perogative and is dissapointing for both debtor and creditor, if anything the trustee should be investigated for failing to carry out all their duties in respect of this ie carry out appropriate financial checks on their debtors,a simple credit check and its done,incompetence at the expense and stress of debtors who it is so so easy for firms to blame is unnacceptable.

You're 100% welcome to your view littlemo.

I think it's one of those matters that people will take different views about.

It's really not as straightforward as a single credit check though. A lot could be missed by that.

I'm also not quite sure how this would be at the expense of the debtor?

Thanks TDA at the expense of the debtor as the debtor has effectivly paid for a service from a trustee/firm and havent got what they paid for...you pay someone to do something and they dont do it...its a very simple concept so i cant see how you dont understand it.

Hi littlemo.

I'm not particularly disagreeing with you - it's not a subject that I/we have a strong view about.

However, how about if the debtor had deliberately not told the trustee about a potential PPI claim (so they could try to claim it themselves later)? People have come on this forum suggesting they might try to do that.

How about if the debtor had genuinely forgotten to direct the trustee to a potential PPI claim? Is it fair that they later get the money rather than the creditors?

How about if a bank that previously refused to make a PPI payment is compelled to by regulatory action months or years later? Lloyds recently found themselves in this boat for example.

It's just not as simple as pinning the "blame" in every instance on a trustee. There's potentially much more to it than that.

It's also just not as simple as saying a credit check would solve it. That will only capture relatively recent open accounts (and may not even capture some of those if a particular lender isn't reporting to a particular credit reference agency). It will not direct anyone towards old fully repaid accounts where PPI might have been mis-sold.

I guess what I think is that you might have a point in some instances, and be quite a long way off the mark in others.

Fair point TDA but i cant move from the Trustees position in terms of the payment they recieve to administer these deeds, i just feel it is always easy to blame the debtor but remember someone who has got to the stage of entering into a trust deed may not have knowlege of any such possible present or future claims and i think it is unfair that they are again put through the emotionsl roller coaster that is a trust deed...your points are very relevent but my opinion wont change, but thanks for taking time to explain and reply.

That's OK littlemo.

I'm not trying to change your opinion, just putting forwards some alternative viewpoints.

It is very important to understand, I think, that even if a trust deed were to be re-opened the debtor wouldn't be "in it" again.

Kevin explained previously that it would only be the trustee who is "in it" again in order to carry on whatever work needed doing.

The ex-debtor remains discharged at all times.

I'm not sure I agree with you Littlemo regarding the debtor paying for the service. Ultimately, any fees paid to the trustee get deducted from funds which would otherwise be payable to a creditor. Essentially, the creditors are paying for the trustees service, hence why the trustee's duty is to creditors in the first instance.

All fair points Voice of Reason.

To set against that perhaps:

1 - People have a choice of trustee. They're choosing which trustee receives a fee for handling their case.

2 - The fee is taken from their money.

3 - If circumstances change financially for the better they may have to fund the fee themselves as well as fully repaying their debts.

4 - If the trust deed fails they'll be responsible for fees before being handed back their remaining debts.

So while I don't agree entirely with littlemo, I don't think I entirely agree with you either!

Hi just to update, unfortunately my trust deed is again showing on the accountant in bankruptcy website so they have been successful in reappointing themselves as trustees in order to distribute the money. I have had no paperwork or anything from them so far.

I'm very sorry to hear that pascal12....i think you really need to contact the AIB and get some information on this, or even contact the court were this decision may have been made, and contact the citizens advice, me personally I would have went to the police about a company withholding a cheque in my name, no doubt about it, I fear we are now entering a period of a free for all insolvency legacy were no one will ever be totally free from a trust deed, word will get out and put people off the very tool that can help them get legitamate debt relief...and if this is copied by the many firms out there then i fear it will have a serious effect on any businesses involved in this industry as no one will go near the very thought of a trust deed..be carefull what you wish for insolvency practitioners.

Hi voiceofreason
Sorry I didn't see your post, well we can all look at things in different ways and I respect your opinion....but i think your wrong,....if I went with your opinion then it would still be the same issue....you say that the trustees first duty is to the creditor, well if I was the creditor the first question I would ask is why wasn't this PPI claim made during the 4 years of the trust deed, because that's what we paid you to investigate.
TDA made some good points but if you want more clarity I suggest you have a wee read of Marks posts on this issue, he speaks a lot of sense and seems to understand the responsibilities of a trustee somewhat more than others.

There was something in the guidance where, in sequestration, the trustee acts for the benefit of the creditors. In a trust deed he acts for the benefit of the creditors, however has a residual obligation to the debtor. I think this is a key point because the basis of both are different.

That said ( and there's always a that said! ) I cannot disagree in any aspect of littlemo's argument that the trustee has an obligation to deal with these matters timeously.

I could appreciate this happening 3/4/5 years ago when ppi was fairly new, but not now as the need to investigate these things have been kicking about for a few years now.

Sometimes keeping the number of live cases on the monthly meeting stats are more important to firms than the number dealt with timeously!

Mark

I have a hazy memory that the trustee in sequestration also has somelevel of responsibility to the debtor. I wish I could remember where that memory comes from! McBryde? Code of Ethics? Somewhere else?

Whilst I don't agree with the entirety of the comments made by littlemo, I do have some misgivings about the idea of trustees being reappointed.

I can see some justice in questioning why trustees haven't sorted out the PPI issue earlier - and certainly before the TD ended.

Can the experts remember when trustees were told that they HAD to look into PPI? Was it 2013 or earlier?

On the other side of the coin, it's not clear why people are applying for PPI refunds for debts which they believe they have already had written off through the trust deed. Or why they only remembered the PPI after the trust deed had ended.

Like it or not, this issue probably isn't as simple as 'debtor good, trustee bad'.

Hi there Candlestick....i hope your hazy memory is getting better and you remember to just google what you need to know...yes im in agreement about the idea of having trustees reinstated, but remember that PPI claims can be very easily investigated by a trustee, and its quite condesceding to make comments like you have about folk all of a sudden remembering to make a claim for PPI after a trust deed...cheap!!!...my opinion only but if you want to get attention just offer some straight forward advice rather than stirring up people who are in this present situation like Pascal12!