one21
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 265
|
Post by one21 on Jan 11, 2020 15:20:15 GMT
Why are we requested to submit a proof of debt when repayments fall short, given that our balances are automatically updated on the plaform. Just more red tape @ c £500/hr! Because thats the way the process works. You arent automatically eligible to be a creditor so you have to submit a claim and then the admin will verify it using the evidence available (at this point they may just review your account rather than requesting supporting docs as is normal) Except the information for supporting docs, is obtained from the platform same as for admin - so its just more time for them to book and charge to us. Quite sickening really!
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,563 
Likes: 1,171
|
Post by shimself on Jan 11, 2020 18:52:22 GMT
I take maximise to refer to an amount, not a percentage. Administrators refer to recoveries as %, ie 80p in £1 so not unreasonable to assume maximise is defined in the same terms. Getting creditors 80p in £1 is better than 50p in the £ and that can be achieved by having recovered more or having less creditors. What looks better on the CV, recovered £1m, creditors got 1p in £, or recovered £1m, creditors got 80p in £? They will follow their statutory duties. Onus is on the creditor to claim not the admin to actively seek out creditors beyond publising their appointment/contacting stakeholders. This is retail, I would expect the administrator to have a duty not to treat investors unfairly. Google isn't giving me a quick answer, and I think you're likely to have a better command of the facts so, maybe; your interpretation seems very wrong to me, but then that's become par for the course
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Jan 11, 2020 21:45:27 GMT
Administrators refer to recoveries as %, ie 80p in £1 so not unreasonable to assume maximise is defined in the same terms. Getting creditors 80p in £1 is better than 50p in the £ and that can be achieved by having recovered more or having less creditors. What looks better on the CV, recovered £1m, creditors got 1p in £, or recovered £1m, creditors got 80p in £? They will follow their statutory duties. Onus is on the creditor to claim not the admin to actively seek out creditors beyond publising their appointment/contacting stakeholders. This is retail, I would expect the administrator to have a duty not to treat investors unfairly. Google isn't giving me a quick answer, and I think you're likely to have a better command of the facts so, maybe; your interpretation seems very wrong to me, but then that's become par for the course Thats not an unreasonable view and I wouldnt be surprised if that is what actually happens, accepting all claims on the basis of one claim. Im afraid Ive become overly cynical as more dirt is revealed and now look for the most narrow, unfavourable interpretation of rules, regs etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Please turn me over on Jan 12, 2020 8:44:32 GMT
|
|
