The initial worry over spending the repayment will need to be dealt with but there is a theme which seems really odd to me.

Companies whoe are deemed to have mis-sold/mistreated customers are made to repay PPI and sometimes interest on it. Whilst anything available to repay all creditors is a good thing, it does not seem right for it to then be re-credited to that company which paid it out in relation to wrong-doing in the first place, at the expense of the other creditors. The person being paid out is still gaining the benefit of the funds if the debt is reduced but somehow, all of it returning to the company who paid it out is twisted, in my view.

How can KPMG have a claim on fcwalker's 4k if he used it to pay a bill BEFORE entering his PTD?

Hi JintyMcSkinty.

KPMG (or any other trust deed provider) would not have a claim (on behalf of the creditors) for a payment made prior to a trust deed starting.

However, if they were aware that a substantial lump sum had been paid over not long before the trust deed began they may feel duty bound to investigate what happened to it.

If it was still there they would want to gather it (as an asset) for the benefit of the creditors.

If it had been used inappropriately, perhaps to repay a certain creditor unfairly in preference to the others, they may wish to take some sort of action to try to recover it.

If it had quite legimately been spent then that would be the end of their interest in the matter.

Thanks TDA.

I suppose it would have been more just if this claim company had their bill added to the PTD and the 4k shared between everyone.
Especially when you consider just how little they done to "earn" that 4k.

Hi JintyMcSkinty.

I know what you mean! I suppose the problem is that it's hard to criticise claims companies too harshly for their fees when so many people are happy to pay them.

As much as the message gets pushed out that we can do it ourselves, a lot of us either cannot be bothered or lack the confidence to do so.