Debt Management Plans and IVAs – and Fee or Free Debt Advice

by on October 26th, 2011

Is a “free” debt management plan always better than paid debt help from a fee-charging company?

I’d like to start by saying ClearDebt Group is a fee charging debt resolution company, proud of what we do and how we help people. Our brand ClearDebt does IVAs and Abacus provides fee-charging debt management plans.

I’ve written before about the assumption many make that free debt advice is always good advice (something I don’t agree with). You’ll find links to those blogs at the bottom of this one.

But, in this blog, I want to concentrate on the question of whether a debt management plan from a fee-free advisor, is automatically better value than a debt management plan or an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA) from a fee-charging debt resolution company like ClearDebt.

I touched on this in another recent blog (IVAs – A Question of Perspective) which looks at some of the key differences between IVAs and DMPs – and critiques leading creditor-funded provider, CCCS’, perspective on this.

Today’s blog has been prompted by two recent blogs from Payplan (a creditor-funded company), the first dealing with a client’s experience of a debt management plan and the second comparing IVAs and DMPs.

In both cases I have commented on the articles and, in both cases, my comments have (at the time of writing, either failed to be published or have been censored. So, I decided to put my thoughts here instead.

A Payplan Client’s Experience

Dawn’s Story:It’s a really good news story about a client (Dawn) who has managed to repay most of her £28,000 debt in four years (and will probably succeed in paying off the lot in 52 months, or thereabouts). But, it raise issues with me because the client said “I have 4 payments left (depending on interest/charges etc) and it feels so good.

Great – but the fact that she seemed not to be sure about interest and charges niggled me.

The issue of transparency when it comes to freezing interest charges

Yes, some creditors freeze interest and some don’t, but a fee-charging debt resolution company is obliged to ensure the client knows what’s what. The fact that this Payplan client didn’t seem to know brought to mind this article from the Guardian published a couple of weeks ago – from which it appears that Payplan was paying a client’s creditors late (debt management companies are supposed, usually, to pay creditors within five working days of getting funds from the client) and, possibly, causing additional charges – Payplan seems to have thought the client owed £143, in fact, there was £4,086 left to pay.

Cases where an IVA is more suitable than a Debt Management Plan

In Dawn’s case, the description of her case led me to think that an IVA (where interest and charges would be frozen for certain, and the possibility of debt forgiveness existed) might have been a better choice for Dawn – so I commented: “It’s great that Dawn has got this far. I wonder, how long has this taken? Also I note that she says “I have 4 payments left (depending on interest/charges etc) and it feels so good”: so presumably her interest and charges were not frozen as they would be in an IVA. Why wasn’t a five year IVA possible in this case?

PayPlan published this and responded. So did Dawn (thank you – it takes a lot to talk publicly about your debt situation). But i wanted to know more and I left the following: “Dawn, I think that’s brilliant: So you must have been paying what, about £540/month (assuming 52 months and most interest and charges frozen?

Payplan published: “Dawn, I think that’s brilliant.

I am not implying Payplan did the wrong thing with this client. There’s no such thing, really as a typical debtor: every case different. And I also understand Dawn might want to protect her privacy. But that should have been said. I really think this case is worth exploring to help others understand when a DMP is the right choice over an IVA (If an IVA is possible, a DMP will rarely be the most appropriate advice).

The same issues are explored in this thread from IVA.co.uk (CCCS – Indifference), which seems to indicate that this creditor funded organisation takes relatively little interest in whether it’s clients are still paying interest.

IVA vs DMP

Which brings me to Payplan’s second blog, a simple DMP vs IVA comparison. It’s pretty good. But it lacked one important point. So I commented:

How about adding: “all interest and charges are frozen when your IVA passes creditor’s meeting”, as this often means a debtor pays thousands less than they would in a debt management plan.

This is still, as I write, awaiting moderation. It’s fact. It makes a huge difference to many debtors. I don’t even want credit for it, I’d just like to see it in the list. It’s something people should know. Payplan does make the point that “Any debt remaining after your IVA is completed is written off.”, but it doesn’t attempt to quantify this. Probably wise; all cases are different – but it seems rather underplayed as an advantage because – again, This can make a huge difference to the debtor. IVA and DMP contributions are usually similar (though DMP contributions are often larger because creditors won’t accept that people in DMPs have financial emergencies whilst they are in their plan) But the typical IVA lasts half the time (five years) of the typical DMP.

Payplan should add one other point to their list of IVA bullets (I’d comment – but what’s the point?): Houses aren’t under threat in an IVA (but could be if you failed to complete the IVA and went bankrupt), but debtors with equity will be asked to make a contribution from that toward the end of their IVA – this is sometimes a pragmatic reason for choosing a DMP instead.

We welcome all comments on this blog and will publish all, unedited, unless they are scurrilous, libellous, pornographic or scatological.

Fee vs Free debt Advice – older blogs:

You get what you pay for

Value and Standards

Redundancy help and support

by on October 18th, 2011

Redundancy is just the catalyst that can tip many people into spiralling debt and an uncontrollable financial situation. We have seen this all too familiar scenario many times.

In these tough economic times the threat of redundancy has never been so rife; with the shocking figure of 1500+ people being made redundant a day- is it any wonder that there is a distinct lack of job security and a great number of people out of work?

Because of this, the topic of redundancy is never far from our blog and we’ve written many different articles about it. Where we could, we have offered support, advice and discussion across a range of redundancy topics; here is a selection of these articles:

Our IVA Supervisory manager, Tylah Thompson details the implications a redundancy can have on your IVA and what you can expect to happen. Read the full article- How redundancy will affect your IVA

In response to the new redundancy figures; an informative article about the connection between redundancy and debt using the Citizens Advice (CAB) guidance in establishing your rights and priority concerns. Read the full article- Unemployment a key cause of debt

An article about the financially vulnerable position most households in the UK are in. With a comment from the chairman of the Consumer Credit Counselling Service (CCCS) about how factors such as redundancy could be the tipping point into real financial difficulty. Read the full article- Debt problems loom for “62 million households’’

Award Winning Debt Advisor: ClearDebt’s Matthew Foley wins the title of “DRF Advisor of the Year 2011”

by on October 12th, 2011

The results are in and…ClearDebt are extremely proud to announce that our very own Matthew Foley has been named “DRF Advisor of the Year 2011”.

Matthew was announced as the winner of this award at the 2011 Debt Resolution Forum Conference which was held on the 27th September in Manchester. He took to the stage at the conference to accept his engraved glass trophy and enjoyed a well deserved round of applause from all in attendance.

The nomination – why we think Matthew is a great debt advisor

As a member of the Debt Resolution Forum (DRF) we were invited to nominate one of our advisors for this award. Matthew Foley was a strong contender and we put together a comprehensive nomination that covered all of the DRF’s criteria.

Matthew was judged in the following areas:

  • His customer satisfaction level
  • Performance
  • His participation and approach to teamwork
  • Level of industry knowledge and awareness
  • And finally his contribution to the company as a whole

As well as this extensive list, Matthew’s nomination also included independent votes and testimonials from many of his clients who wanted to speak up about the standard of service and care he provided.

All nominations for this award were considered by the DRF Board. To guarantee that there could be no bias towards one advisor over another, all personal and company information was removed from the nomination submissions before being shown to the Board. This was done to ensure that the winner was chosen purely on merit. Board members who had submitted nominations were unable to vote for their own candidate.

DRF Board decision

David Mond, Chairman of the DRF announced that Matthew had won the award at this year’s DRF Conference. Hosted in Manchester, this prestigious annual event is attended by 250 professionals working within the debt solution industry. David Mond explained, Matthew received more independent votes from board members and client testimonials than any of the other nominee.

The DRF has since stated:

Matthew was nominated by ClearDebt based on his integrity of character, professional development, ability to lead by example and his approach to going the extra mile in the standard of advice and care he provides to clients. Matthew also received a high level of client votes sent in from people he had helped, directly to the DRF, explaining how his advice and care had given them confidence in a solution which could help them work towards a debt free future.

You can read more about this award and the other winners at the DRF website here: Award Winning Calibre – DRF Award Winners 2011. We hope you will join us in congratulating Matthew on his truly justified win. He is an inspiration to all here at ClearDebt and Abacus. The DRF Awards will be back next year and we hope to recognise more members of staff with nominations for the 2012 award categories.

How redundancy will affect your IVA

by on October 5th, 2011

“I am in an IVA and I have just been made redundant”- a state of affairs that will undoubtedly cause panic. Tylah Thompson, Head of ClearDebt’s Supervisory Team, discusses the implications for people in an IVA who are facing redundancy.

Tylah has worked in the finance sector since 2004 and along with her team she manages the process of client communication and documentation once an IVA is in place.

With the news reporting higher and higher redundancy figures it looks as if this could be a situation a number of ClearDebt and Abacus clients could find themselves in.

From my perspective as the IVA supervisory manager I will try to lessen the strain of this stressful situation by explaining what you can expect and how your redundancy will affect your IVA.

There is usually one of two avenues to take when a client has been made redundant that depend on the circumstances of the case and the circumstances of the individual’s redundancy.

It is important to note that any lump sum received in the event of redundancy is considered a windfall under the terms of an IVA however this does not necessarily mean 100% of it will come into the IVA, unless you have been able to find employment immediately.

IVA covered by Waiver of Contributions

As soon as we are notified of your redundancy, the first thing we will look at is whether you are covered by our Waiver of Contribution (WOC) policy. This policy is designed to protect the IVA payments in the event of sickness, accident or involuntary unemployment, not all IVA clients will have this policy depending on when your IVA was approved.

If you do have the policy running alongside your IVA, we then need to check whether or not you will be covered in line with the criteria.

Our WOC is called IVA Protect.

Providing the claim is successful, IVA payments should be covered for up to 12 months.

If you are in receipt of a redundancy lump sum, and your IVA payments will be covered until you find alternative work, you will be able to keep in the region of six months worth of essential living costs to ease your time out of work and introduce the remaining balance. However if you enter work within those six months, the surplus of those funds will be expected to be paid into the IVA.

If the redundancy lump sum is less than six months worth of essential costs, then you will be able to retain those funds but also bear in mind that if employment is found quickly, you may have an amount to introduce into your IVA.

What happens when you are not covered by WOC?

Again, the route that we take also depends on your individual circumstances.

The first thing we look at is whether there has been a redundancy lump sum provided.

If there has been no redundancy lump sum issued, the Supervisor can arrange a payment break for a period of six months. With IVA Protocol cases, this payment break does not have to be put to or agreed by your creditors but older cases will require creditors’ consent. Creditors are usually very understanding in these situations and tend to agree to payment breaks of this nature with no issues.

If a redundancy lump sum has been received, then you will be allowed to retain the equivalent of six months net income, and from this also maintain contributions to your IVA, the surplus expected to be introduced into the IVA.

Now the period of six months is mentioned a lot, and sometimes we find that clients have not been able to find suitable employment within this time. In these situations we usually refer back to creditors to report or request an extension payment break of a further 3 to 6 months.

Large lump sums

Now occasionally, a client may receive such a large lump sum as part of a redundancy package that will enable them to pay their debts in full, including interest and fees in which case the Supervisor can usually close the IVA and issue certificate of completion and notify creditors of the satisfied IVA.

Similarly, if a large lump sum has been introduced into the IVA, raising the amount that is being returned to creditors, and it has been proven that the client can not gain another position paying the same level of salary, therefore jeopardising the affordability of the IVA, then in those circumstances, the Supervisor may be willing to put forward a proposal asking creditors to consider settlement based on funds paid into the IVA at that time.

As can be seen, there is no rule that fits all cases but what I have mentioned above is generally what happens in the majority of cases.

If you have any questions or concerns about this, then please contact an advisor. Alternatively you can post a question on the ClearDebt community.

ClearDebt speak up about the possibility that debt management companies could be banned from using social media

by on October 3rd, 2011

The Office of Fair Trading released their new debt management guidance in June this year and debt management companies were invited to take part in a consultation process. One aspect of this guidance was the use of social media by debt management companies. It appeared that fee-charging debt management companies might be banned, by the OFT, from using Facebook, Twitter and, possibly, Google Adwords.

ClearDebt’s Andrew Smith has been quite outspoken on his disagreement with the idea that debt management companies could be banned from using social media and was quoted in the Telegraph last month saying:

What they are looking at are today’s methods of mass marketing, and they are not giving us the opportunity to compete. Also, they are limiting one of the best ways of exposing the cowboys. When cowboys turn up in our industry one of the best ways of exposing their lack of knowledge or experience is by debating with them on social media.

Here are some of the other reactions to this, as expressed through the social media channel Twitter, you can view the OFT’s response at the end of this blog post.

The deadline for submitting responses to the new debt management guidance was 5th September. You can read ClearDebt’s response here.
You can also follow Andrew Smith on Twitter @andrew_f_smith.

Since we wrote this article, the OFT have told us that there is no intention to ban debt resolution companies from using social networking, but that companies will have to be careful that statements they make will be clear and truthful. This seems right and fair, but we look forward to seeing the OFT’s detailed guidance on the issue – and will continue to watch the story, and comment, until then.

Page 4 of 59« First...23456...102030...Last »