Getting out of an IVA?

[kellysangels1]

Hi,

 

I have an IVA which I have been paying for the past 3 years or so and haverecently heard from the Debt Management company that my IVA will not be complete until 2010 even though it is for 5 years. The reason they gave is becasue it took 2 yesr for the stupid thing to go to court...can they do this? How come I agreed a 5 year contract with them and now they are saying it is 8 years?

 

I am desperately looking for a way to get out of this contract, either by loan or something else(not quite sure yet)

 

Can anyone give me any advice?

 

Thanks

Kelly

[gizmo111]

What does it say in your original IVA agreement. Have you discussed this with your IP?

[Jimbo44]

Hi,

 

I have an IVA which I have been paying for the past 3 years or so and haverecently heard from the Debt Management company that my IVA will not be complete until 2010 even though it is for 5 years. The reason they gave is becasue it took 2 yesr for the stupid thing to go to court...can they do this? How come I agreed a 5 year contract with them and now they are saying it is 8 years?

 

I am desperately looking for a way to get out of this contract, either by loan or something else(not quite sure yet)

 

Can anyone give me any advice?

 

Thanks

Kelly

 

I may well be wrong, but I was under the impression an IVA didn't begin (and payments under it therefore not needed) until it had been approved by the court and until it had been approved by a stated majority of your creditors.

 

Just a question, though. You say you've been paying for three years and I assume (hope) that money has been going towards the 'IVA pot'?

[kellysangels1]

Just a question, though. You say you've been paying for three years and I assume (hope) that money has been going towards the 'IVA pot'?

 

That was my question to them and they said that the money that I was paying prior to teh court date was for charges, But in the first letter I received from them the charges are stated at £550 which i have/had paid well over that as I have been paying over £250 each month

 

The company I am doing it through do not respond to any letters or phone calls, they are the worst company I have ever had dealings with and wish I had been able to sort it out myself!

 

I'm tryign to arrange a meeting with my bank manager to see if there is anythig they can do!....I hold little hope though!

[kellysangels1]

Hi everyone I am looking for some advice on my IVA.

 

I have been paying a company since October 2004 to sort out my finances and it has all gone ok (i've stopped getting calls and letters from creditors) which has made my life much easier!

 

For some reason I decided to get my paperwork out the other day and take a look at it and I have come across a few things which don't make sense to me!

 

1. IVA's are for 3-5 years, but according to my company it will not be settled until 2010 as the case only got taken to court in 2005? So what happens to the first year and a half's money? According to them it's there fee, but I payed £250 up front (which I was told was there fee!! thast almost £3000+ that has gone missing??)

 

2. They give you little free money for christmas and birthdays and if you phone them up asking to minimise the payments for 1 month they make yoi feel so little that they canstamp on you, so again...they make you struggle!

 

I havereally had it with this company. I would advise nobody to ever get an IVA out as although they do stop the phone calls, they rip you off something cronic!!

 

I'm really looking for a way out at the moment so any advice would be brilliant, thank you!

 

Kelly

[Bailiffchaser]

Speak to the citizens advice . they should be able to help you. I have never been involved with a iva so havent got a clue about what it is !!!!

[gizmo111]

Kelly are you sure this is an IVA not a DMP as I am not aware of any IVA that changes monthly payments or gives you a xmas holiday.

[Gingerheid]

Why did it take two years for it to get to court? Were there negotiations with reluctant creditors / rejected proposals....

 

If there is a legitimate reason for the delay then technically there is no reason why you shouldn't have been paying what you could to your creditors until the IVA was finalised, so you would not have technically have suffered a loss . (I take it the creditors did see the money??? )

 

I can only think of two ways out an IVA, but for the ways out yours you would need to read the agreement you have. There is always however bankruptcy on the supervisor's petition if the IVA fails, and sometimes something like a payment for example from the proceeds of the sale of the house the IVA was designed to protect, or some other way.

 

I'm not sure what payment from some other way would be though, as the IVA agreement probably gives your creditors entitlement to their paws on any windfall you come by during the duration of the agreement.

 

I'd be amazed if anyone would give you a loan while you had a current IVA.

[bill-k]

Hi Kelly,

 

Gizmo mentioned your thread to me. I am in a Trust Deed, which is a Scottish IVA, so there are differences. But I have been asking around, as I now find myself unable to acquire any lump sums of money without "losing" it straight away to the creditors. I have asked around, and so far the stuff I have found is this:

 

The admins of an IVA can be an obstructive bunch, and often seem hell-bent on keeping you in the dark and feeding you $h1t. Not sure about IVA mechanics, but a Trust Deed is taken out with an Insolvency Practitioner, who inhabits some ivory tower, defended by the admins. If you can directly contact the IP, they can often be most helpful, if you're honest with them. One contact of mine regularly telephoned his !!

 

As Gingerheid says, getting a loan is going to be nigh on impossible, unless you take on a doorstep loan shark, I reckon. And of course that would NOT solve anything. Getting a "cash" loan from friends & family seems the only way that the "loan" route can work. And be very careful here, too. If you manage to get enough cash together, do NOT tell your IVA admins that you have got it. If you can get fam/friends to help you, get one of them to act as your "benefactor." THEY then tell the IVA admins/IP that they can pay the balance currently owing on the IVA, on your behalf, ON THE CLEAR CONDITION that it discharges you from the IVA. Basically, "paying off" an IVA early gives the creditors their agreed amount of money early (eg., 20p in the £, which is 20% of what you originally owed them). It is an advantage to them to get this earlier than they would have, so it should NOT in theory be a problem. But, it seems that IVA providers are just damn lazy, and will not help you do this.

 

As far as I know, there is nothing to stop you approaching your creditors yourself, and explaining what it is that you are trying to get your IVA admins to do. Chances are the admins haven't told them a bl**dy dickie-bird about your proposals, so if YOU tell them, then you might get them on your side with this, and THEY will start telling the IVA admins what THEY want. I should point out that this is something I considered but have NOT actually tried, so it is all theory so far. Don't directly offer your creditors any money, though, as this will be acting outside of your IVA terms, I'm sure.

 

The time it took for the IVA to be agreed, and the "fees" you were charged certainly doesn't make me feel that your IVA provider is one of the "good guys." Try being straight with the IP him/her self, first of all, and see if you get anything positive or helpful. Read between the lines of what you get back from them, and if it doesn't seem too good, then consider contacting the creditors (make sure you contact ALL of them, and get a written response from ALL of them). Try and get the creditors to ALL agree with you that they would prefer to get their money now, rather than later, and that the only obstruction to them getting it is your IP. Then you might be able to get them to force the IP to have a creditors' meeting, and they will "force" the IVA to accept your "friend's" offer of an early settlement. I stress this is theory, but it makes sense to me. The only reason I have not done this is that I just have a coupla years of enforced "poverty" to go with my TD, and it seems less hassle to let than run its' course, than to contact all our creditors, etc., etc., etc. In your case, though, it looks like the hassle may be worth it.

 

Sorry if all this seems like reading "War and Peace." Please step back, then go back over it again slowly, so that it starts to focus. Then do it again. Hopefully, there's something in there to give you a plan of action. But be polite, yet firm, with your IVA admins., and polite with your creditors. Your creditors have accepted a reduced amount of what you owed them, so appreciate that. But if you can offer them that amount NOW, rather than in several years' time, then you are offering them something BETTER than what they originally settled for. They might not be grateful for it, but they should prefer that, and if the IP doesn't pass that on to them, then by telling them that is what you offered the IP, you should get them all on your side.

 

But stay polite and genuine all the way (not easy with these $0d$, I KNOW !!). Remember that you're still dealing with people like yourself, behind their facade, and it's amazing who you can get on your side, sometimes, if you speak with your heart AS WELL as with your head.

 

I hope that has given you some food for thought. Don't choke on it - chew it slowly !!! But please post back here and tackle me on anything I've said that doesn't make sense. Keep my opinion out of it, and try and form your own opinion, from what I have been able to tell you of my experience so far.

 

Hope that helps, my friend !!

 

Bill.

[7givenchy]

Hello Bill

 

I am also in a Trust Deed which I entered in June 2005 - shortly after this in July 2005 I was forced to resign from work due to serious health problems (heart ,diabetes, thyroid). I have struggled to pay the £100 towards my trust deed as I only receive basic incapacity benefit. I wrote to my IP in July 2006 informing them of the change in my circumstances and asking for advice. I explained that I was eager not to break the contract I entered into with them, however I received no reply and I have continued to pay. It has got so bad my family are now supporting me.

 

I recently successfully claimed back £1200 in credit card charges from Halifax Bank of Scotland which I hoped to use to continue to make my payments. HBOS credited the sum to my account which has been closed for 18 months. I contacted them informing them that I am in a Trust Deed but they said they were keeping the money.

 

I contacted the IP office 2 weeks ago to inform them that my claim had been successful but the bank would not refund the mony. I was asked to send all revlevant documents I sent copies of Summons and letters from HBOS. I enclosed copies of letters from consultants etc to verify my state of health. I have had no reply. I would be most grateful for any suggestions about how best to proceed.

[bill-k]

Hi 7givenchy, I just saw your post here. I have to go out now, but will get back to you about this. I don't know yet if I have anything that will help, but I have also had that problem where they pay it into your closed account. I am fighting this move at present, so we have a common cause here, if nothing else.

 

I will get back to you later.

 

Bill.

[Gingerheid]

Someone else might know better, but my gut reaction would be that they would have a valid right of set off that they could exercise, and that the correct procedure would be for them to reduce their debt and tell the IP about their revised claim in the arrangement.

 

I fear the money was never heading your direction at all I'm afraid - if they had paid it to you then you'd far more than likely have had to pay it to the IP in addition to the monthly payments anyway.

 

Not getting a reply is unsatisfactory though - make them reply!

 

Edit on seeing Bill-K's post: 7Givenchy's problem is more deep rooted than the bank exercising a right of set off - their main problem is that the right of action against the bank was an asset they had at the time of entering into the arrangement, and that on top of this any payout they receive is a windfall that most IVA arrangements are robustly enough worded to snaffle. I would presume the Scottish arrangement is sufficiently similar, and that 7Givenchy would have to struggle to get the money not just out the bank, but past the IP as well.

 

* Disclaimer... I am thinking English Law not Scots Law. I know nothing about Scots law.

[7givenchy]

Hello All

 

Many thanks for your swift replies!!

 

It was always my intention to inform the IP if my claim was successful and I was aware that they would probably use the money to offset my debts.

 

I thought however that as my financial circumstances had changed considerably and that I was no longer in employment they might consider

using the proceeds of my claim to offset my payments to the trust deed.

 

As far as I remember one of the conditions of the trust deed was that the person was currently in employment and on entering the deed the IP drew up a statment of Income and Expenditure leaving the person in the deed with basic living expenses. As previously stated I am no longer able to work and I am currently in receipt of £317.00 per month Incapacity Benefit. I pay £100 towards my deed and I am left with £217.00 per month to exist as a result of this I am being supported by my grown up children. and have attempted to discuss the situatution with the IP without success

 

I had a long chat with one of the legal team at HBOS regarding my claim, the young man concerned was sympathetic to my situation and I

in turn could fully appreciate the banks postition, but wonder what the legal position is.

 

Regards!!!!

[Gingerheid]

Sorry - I only answered one of the questions!

 

With an IVA if you don't make the payments it 'fails' and the supervisor petitions for your bankruptcy. I presume a PTD is the same? The agreement might provide that creditors can agree a change... it's best to have read at it, or phone and make them answer you.

[7givenchy]

Hi Gingerheid

 

Thanks you for your advice - in the morning I will read carefully the small print in the deed. I appreciate the point you are making. I may have overllooked this. I am eager to continue with the deed if possible at a reduced rate of payment

 

Sandra

 

PS There are so many "gingerheids" in my family I am almost one and my son is a fully fledged "gingerheid"

[gizmo111]

This is a long thread and on a business account but in the middle there is info on a IP's position on refunds of bank charges being a windfall and how they should be distributed.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/26925-business-account-over-19-a.html

[Gingerheid]

Great link. In this case the IP has recognised the bank's right of set off , and in addition a set off between two products from the bank. If the same line were followed in 7Givenchy's case the order of payment would be

 

1 > The credit card the charges were made on

2 > Any other debt on an HBOS provided product such as another credit card or a bank overdraft

3 > 50/50 the IP and 7Givenchy.

 

I gather that in this case there is nothing left after step 1, so it looks like 7Givenchy may be out of luck

[bill-k]

Thanks enormously to Gingerheid for your input here. I will read through your posts more thoroughly again, as I am trying to find out as much as poss. about this. My own TD admins are not very helpful at all, and I may try writing directly to my IP with a "Private & Confidential" to avoid interception. Yes, as with English IVA's, if one defaults on payments, then bankruptcy (or "sequestration") can be applied for by the admins. Mine got off to a bad start by missing the first few payments, but as I had provided the bank details for payments, it was the admins that had made the error. My annual statement showed that the IP had simply re-scheduled my TD time-scale to account for this.

 

7Givenchy - As Gingerheid says, any lump sum or "windfall" gets "snaffled" (nifty term !!) and is just thrown to the creditors. It doesn't benefit the debtor one bit as it is not offset against the TD payments still due. I have two questions on what constitutes a "lump sum" here:-

 

1. There must be a lower limit, otherwise every penny I acquire goes to the creditors. I originally thought £1,000 was reasonable, but I have heard just £200 as the threshold. I would still like to know for sure. I am currently trying to chop my claims up into less-than-£200 chunks to get them below the radar, but it's a pain in the a$$ - and the big claims have to be left for now.

 

2. Could certain acquisitions be exempt by their nature ? Bank charges are money which we previously had earned and paid tax on, before it was "snaffled" unlawfully. If we subsequently have that returned to us, then it is not additional wealth, as in a "windfall" - it is simply restitution of our previous wealth by those who drove us to the Trust Deed in the first place. Had we not had this cash taken, then we would not have had to take out the TD, and both us and our creditors would have been better off. The villains here are the creditors, it seems, and that to my mind makes it a little less simple for them to claim our previous wealth. Veiled threats of damages claims seem a possibility here, to encourage them to be a little "magnanimous."

 

I have a wee thread on my own TD - which might have some useful stuff on it. I'll post the link up later. I said this in it:-

 

I am looking to claim back unlawful charges from accounts which were closed when the TD was taken out. My reasoning is this:

 

1. They took this money from me UNLAWFULLY - years ago, some of it - and they have kept it all this time.

 

2. In doing so, they played a big part in forcing me to take out the TD.

 

3. The TD was taken out LAWFULLY, and with their agreement, whereas the penalty charges were NOT.

 

4. I believe that I am entitled to legally claim money UNLAWFULLY taken from me, regardless of who took it.

 

5. I believe the banks are entitled to legally claim money LAWFULLY owed to them, which is their TD dividend.

 

6. I do NOT believe the banks have a right to keep the penalty charges they UNLAWFULLY took from me.

 

7. So there !!

 

I have one credit card so far that has refunded the charges to itself by paying into my closed account. I have written to them, but am still awaiting a reply. I do believe that there is a possibility of getting them to relinquish their apparent "right" to do this - either on grounds that the refund is not a "windfall" for the purposes of a TD, or by the "veiled threat" of a damages claim for forcing me to take out a TD because of their previous unlawful actions.

 

Trouble is, this is just my feeling and opinion, and I have no real idea of what the law is on this. If anybody here can help with that, then I can maybe go forward with my "7 steps to Heaven" above !!!

 

I admit this is mostly just my opinion, here, but if 7G & I both have some of this stuff in common, then that in itself is some help, I think.

 

Bill.

[bill-k]

My wee thread:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/42981-trust-deed-scottish-iva.html

[Gingerheid]

1. There must be a lower limit, otherwise every penny I acquire goes to the creditors. I originally thought £1,000 was reasonable, but I have heard just £200 as the threshold. I would still like to know for sure. I am currently trying to chop my claims up into less-than-£200 chunks to get them below the radar, but it's a pain in the a$$ - and the big claims have to be left for now.

 

Your agreements might specify a limit - I've seen £250 and £500 in England. Failing that I think the limit is 1p, as modified upwards by what the IP thinks it's worth his time claiming. I think IPs usually get a 15% cut, so depending on the relative efficiencies of their offices and how much work they have, more than a few hundred seems about right. I doubt they'd want to recalculate distributions to a number of creditors for any less than £30.

 

 

Playing devils advocate, not trying to wind you up or anything, just giving you the arguments I'd expect you would receive...:

 

2. Could certain acquisitions be exempt by their nature ? Bank charges are money which we previously had earned and paid tax on, before it was "snaffled" unlawfully. If we subsequently have that returned to us, then it is not additional wealth, as in a "windfall" - it is simply restitution of our previous wealth by those who drove us to the Trust Deed in the first place. Had we not had this cash taken, then we would not have had to take out the TD, and both us and our creditors would have been better off. The villains here are the creditors, it seems, and that to my mind makes it a little less simple for them to claim our previous wealth. Veiled threats of damages claims seem a possibility here, to encourage them to be a little "magnanimous."

 

Playing devils advocate, money that has been earned and paid tax on is also the money that you would otherwise have used to pay your creditors. So in theory, there isn't a loss to you in this regard if the money you reclaim goes that direction, whether through a set off or via the PTD.

 

You've also recognised that these payments due to you do indeed represent previous wealth. Previous wealth is something I presume you declared on the PTD proposal, to the extent that you were aware of it. If you had been aware of these potentially lucrative rights of action you would have declared them, and they would have been taken into account by creditors in considering the proposal.

 

In addition, it is also previous wealth that would have been realised through lower debts, which is exactly the position today to which GreedyBank Plc have restored bill-k.

 

1. They took this money from me UNLAWFULLY - years ago, some of it - and they have kept it all this time.

 

So it can be claimed back. The directors of GreedyBank Plc have already done this (to the closed account).

 

2. In doing so, they played a big part in forcing me to take out the TD.

 

If you can prove this it would be interesting.

 

But my fear would be that you can't, you will only be able to show that your position would merely have been better shade of bad. Most people, even those that 'don't have debt problems' live their lives technically insolvent.

 

If the charges hadn't been made, would you be able to maintain the contractual repayments on your debt today?

 

Also, many of us are adept at minimising charges by juggling debts, and I usually see people that don't actually suffer that many charges on their credit cards until close to the 'end'. Bank accounts can be different as they are perhaps harder to manage.

 

I don't know whether the fact that it would probably be hard to identify an individual institution responsible would be a problem (unless you had a lot of different type of debt with the same institution.

 

I'm also not sure what you'd say the consequential loss as a result of the insolvency was.

 

My recommended route to go about looking to see if you can evidence that creditors were to blame would be to establish, for each month,

 

1 > Your income

 

2 > Your essential expenses (PTD proposal probably relates)

3 > Regular non essential expenses (ie extra DDs and SOs you had before but not now)

4 > The money you spent on top of this (ie all spending less 2 less 3)

 

5 > The payments under contractual loan obligations in that month, less interest on unlawful charges and the parts of minimum payments relating to accumulated unlawful charges

6 > The unlawful charges in that month, plus the interest on unlawful charges and the parts of minimum payments relating to accumulated unlawful charges

 

You would then have to look to see what patterns could be established.

 

You would be looking to show that taking 6 out the calculations, your financial position would have been viable, or that it would have become viable if you excluded 2 + 3.

 

In England you'd also be looking to show that you did everything possible to minimise the loss, so I'd be expecting to see signs of the efforts to make 3 + 4 fall a bit as 6 rises.

 

In addition to the above, to show that you would otherwise be able to repay your debts you'd want to work out what your debt repayment would be if the charges had been lawful, and that on your income and the level of expenses the PTD allows, you'd have been able to pay these.

 

There would be a lot of work in this, but you could do a few sample months and see if the picture was looking pretty.

 

3. The TD was taken out LAWFULLY, and with their agreement, whereas the penalty charges were NOT.

 

And... it lawfully snaffles windfalls, with your agreement. This was the proposal you made to creditors out of your own free will. You could have put to creditors a proposal that allowed you to keep windfalls, but you chose not to.

 

You may also propose to creditors an amendment to the PTD to allow you to keep windfalls, and they would be free to chose whether to accept or not.

 

4. I believe that I am entitled to legally claim money UNLAWFULLY taken from me, regardless of who took it.

 

You are. The directors of GreedyBank Plc are not trying to stop you. The question is who is entitled to what you reclaim.

 

5. I believe the banks are entitled to legally claim money LAWFULLY owed to them, which is their TD dividend.

 

Absolutely. A dividend which is based on the debt as reduced by any valid right of set of exercised, and which includes a fair distribution of any windfall pro rata to the claim in the insolvency.

 

6. I do NOT believe the banks have a right to keep the penalty charges they UNLAWFULLY took from me.

 

GreedyBank Plc are not trying to keep the money they took from you, allegedly unlawfully.

 

They are lawfully setting it off against the money you lawfully took from them

[bill-k]

Thanks for that link to Dolfos, Gizmo. One heck of a story (I've just flitted through the lot !!)

 

As well as the IVA discussion near the start, there was a single lonely post by Bong that caught my eye, which no-one appeared to respond to:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-322005.html

[Gingerheid]

dolfos - my thoughts are that imagine you didn't have an iva and you were reclaiming the money. would the bank be entitled in that instance to set it off against the business loan?

Definitely I'm afraid. Absolutely yes. As long as they are with the same company. Add the things is of course... they do have an IVA.

 

I wouldn't have thought so - but maybe that's just my way of thinking - surely banks can't start helping themselves to money in other accounts to repay themselves?

They might struggle to swipe your salary against your defaulted credit card arrears if you weren't in an insolvent arrangement purely in terms of loss of face, by the T's and C's for my current account do actually say they can!

 

now bring back the iva into the picture, I would say that the money doesn't fall into the iva pot - unless there are very specific provisions in the proposal/agreement for this.

Which there always are, unfortunately.

 

this was money that always belonged to you, that you didn't know you had a legal claim over until after the iva was set up, so it is not technically I believe a windfall - just my thoughts.

If it's not a windfall then it even more definitely falls into the IVA unfortunately. You were very aware that you had to declare assets you had. Not knowing about a right of action you had as at that date doesn't stop it falling into the arrangement. If you never knew your premium bonds had come up, the winnings would still fall into the agreement.

 

I think the reason that your ip hasn't been able to give you a clear answer is that the insolvency legislation doesn't (or didn't used to) provide for all the different things that can happen during the course of the iva, that all has to be taken care of in the drafting of the proposal. and if its not, and there is a grey area I think you may be able to get your supervisor to agree to let you keep the money.

I think the IPs answer was pretty spot on, if not perhaps possibly even generous in allowing it to be treated as only a windfall!

 

If the creditors didn't like the way the proposal was drafted they had their chance to get it changed before they voted on it. at the end of the day though I think you need your supervisors blessing to use the money but if you can get some free independent legal advice it might stand you in good stead.

But the proposal will have been drafted to claim it. I don't know about PTDs, but one thing I do know is that IVAs always are.

[7givenchy]

Hi Bill

 

Thanks for your input, I have had a read through your thread on Trust Deed. There is so much to consider, and we are certainly in a similar postition. I had thought about giving up as I thought it seemed that I was the only person in this position. Reading through the posts has made me feel like continuing the fight. Would it be all right to PM you

 

Regards!

[bill-k]

Kelly - sorry to hijack your thread while you get back to Gizmo with the answer to her question. I hope this is all of use to you !!!

 

Gingerheid - Thanks a million indeed for all your time and effort on this - it is much appreciated !!

There is no limit set in our TD docs., so if I want a set figure, I will have to try and get my IP to commit himself to one, I guess.

FWIW I was not aware of the previous wealth when I took out the TD, otherwise I might well have not taken it out and attempted to reclaim my money and avoid the TD.

Also, I was not aware that I had any choice with regard to altering the terms of my TD to enable me to keep windfalls. But I guess the fact there is that, had I tried to get my creditors to agree to that, then I would have found they objected and the TD would have not become protected.

 

I have to tell you, good sir, that I totally dislike just about everything you said back there !!! But then that is the thanks the Devil's Advocate gets, isn't it. However, I would much rather you told me all that stuff now (as you so kindly and painstakingly have done), than find some barrister with the smell of blood in his nostrils telling me the same in court.

 

So, of course, that doesn't make me a happy chappy, Gingerheid, but I sincerely do thank you for all you have said here.

 

I guess we are at the mercy of our IP's (and thus creditors), because we chose to throw ourselves there. Our only hope, therefore, if we wish to do anything other than what our TD says on the tin, seems to be to negotiate with our IP, and be very very nice to him/her.

 

Thanks again, matey !!

 

Bill.

[bill-k]

Hi Bill

 

Thanks for your input, I have had a read through your thread on Trust Deed. There is so much to consider, and we are certainly in a similar postition. I had thought about giving up as I thought it seemed that I was the only person in this position. Reading through the posts has made me feel like continuing the fight. Would it be all right to PM you

 

Regards!

 

A trouble shared...

 

Thanks for asking first, 7givenchy - please do.