I wouldn’t be so sure about that Dusty.

Have you met any of these PIP’s?
The PIP’s themselves will confirm that this “new insolvency legislation” is only designed to cater for people who have money and are basically solvent.
They will also confirm that there is nothing in this “new insolvency legislation” for people who are insolvent/broke (namely the people that this “new insolvency legislation” was really supposed to help)
You will also find that most of theses PIP’s are also working as receivers for the banks, and that they are not obliged to tell you this unless asked.
I spoke to a heartbroken woman in long term financial distress recently, who had spent her last few hundred Euro on an appointment with a PIP,
only to be told near the end of the consultation that the PIP acted as a receiver for the same bank that was going to repossess her home,
and that the PIP could do nothing for her because she had no money/was insolvent.
She has been strung along by Shatter and the likes for the last 5 years,
being told that “we are bringing in”
“new insolvency legislation”
“to help people in your situation”
The poor woman wishes that she went for U.K. bankruptcy 5 years ago,
when she still had a little savings,
she has nothing now.

Tell me mister Shatter
Who exactly is this “new insolvency legislation” designed for,
as is it definitely not designed for insolvent/broke people?

Ah now there are lots more options

@gathering If she is broke and cannot afford the fees of a PIP, how could she afford to uproot and relocate to the UK to apply for UK insolvency? By the way PIPs do have to disclose conflicts of interest. If that one didn’t he’s potentially in trouble if what you say is true.

I call shenanigans – conflict of interest would have to be disclosed. It is without doubt a middle class debt settlement. – I don’t believe I said anything different, if you don’t have enough to offer the lender, they’ll simply veto your offer.

@ Solbank I am only quoting what the PIS’s themselves have said.
@ Truth Patrol & Dusty
5 years ago in the early days of her financial distress, the woman did have a small amount of savings left, after being strung along by Shatter and the likes for 5 years she now has nothing,
she is currently in a very bad way, after 5 years of torment at the hands of untrained bullyboy bank staff,
I can understand why.
The woman is only in her only 40′s and has been basically rendered a financial leper by the banks and our fine leaders and protectors.
As I have said above, the PIP did not disclose that they acted as receivers for the banks until after she had committed the money and only when asked this by the woman.
I have heard of this happening in another case however no fees had been charged.

Is this just a sneaky way for Receivers masquerading as PIPs gleaning sensitive inside information from distressed borrowers and getting paid for the privilege the only cost being couple of grand spent on a PIP course??

Just to ask what experience have you had with PIP’s?

I’ve had quite a bit of experience with PIP’s, the ISI, receivers and the Arrears Support Units of the banks. The legislation has big gaps no doubt. It is for those earning 50k plus – no doubt. It will not help those with low incomes – no doubt. Solicitors & accountants acting as pips will be expecting to charge solicitors & accounts rates no doubt. So whilst you raise some valid points, they are undermined by a very dubious anecdote and an unhelpful dash of conspiracy theory.

@ Dusty You confirm the holes in this Legislation.
Yet you label a physical practical example of these holes as a “conspiracy theory”.
So you are trying to say that the legislation is flawed in certain areas by design, but not in practice??
Are you a PIP Dusty?

No disrespect meant
However
Is Kenny waiting for another Fiachra Kelly incident before he will act?

Please remember it was a letter from a bank (KBC, “the bank of you”) that was the last straw for Fiachra.

RIP Fiachra

Fiachra Daly, not kelly.
No, not a PIP gladly, the conspiracy theory I was referring to was receivers masquerading as PIPs to glean sensitive information for their overlords … a tad incentive I reckon.

Yes I meant to say Fiachra Daly.
Sorry for any confusion caused.

The facts Dusty are
(1)That the majority of the Personal Insolvency Practitioners (PIPs) also work for the banks as receivers.
(2)These receivers/PIPs have access to confidential, delicate information from the distressed borrowers whom have mortgages with the very same banks.
(3)These receivers/PIPs take fees and in many cases upfront fees from their distressed borrower clients.

A couple of question for you Dusty.
(1) Do you really think that PIP’s will not use the personal, delicate information that they glean from their financially distressed customers for their own personal gain or the for the gain of their powerful wealthy banker clients?
and
(2) What assurances/guarantees does a distressed borrower have that the above will not happen?
(3) can you show me the part in the legislation where it states that the PIP must declare his/her conflict of interest to the distressed borrower
and the part in the legislation where it states that in what stage of the PIP meeting must the PIP declare his/her conflict of interest to the distressed borrower?

Members of the endemically corrupt financial industry don’t exactly have any sort of Seal of Confession
do they?
This is a perfect example of Poacher turned Gamekeeper come Poacher.

In relation to point(1) – could you name me one of the 52 PIPs currently licensed in the country who also acts as receiver for a bank. If you do, I would happily fully address all your other points … I could make a hefty bet that you won’t name one. In that case, we may draw our on conclusions I guess ..

Grant Thornton
Friel Stafford
Did you read the list of PIPs Dusty?
http://www.isi.gov.ie/en/ISI/webPIPAuthNum?OpenView&Count=-1

CORPORATE receivers, PERSONAL insolvency – they will not be handling receivership of property owned by individuals. The latter is almost exclusively the work of estate agents and chartered surveyors.

Don’t forget the PIP world’s for the debtor and is required to submit a proposal which will make the debtor solvent within 5 years.

Can’t see how they can do this if they are secretly working for the banks.

So Individuals have no involvement in the Corporate world Dusty?
Please do not try to deviate from the facts
These PIP’s have worked and still work for the bank’s as receivers.
This is a fact that has to date been omitted from media articles on PIPs.
C’mon spit it out Dusty
Tell us what dog you have in this fight?
Why defend this not fit for purpose legislation, that has been practically penned by the banks and rubber stamped by their penny boys in our government?

Please don’t try to defend the indefensible Dusty.

Yes better. My court case is in Manchester in a matter of days. If it’s successful I’m willing to help anyone that wants to do the same.

The facts arev simple enough really. Corporate receivers are Court mandated and supervised from start to finish as such, their actions are closely monitored. They deal solely with the assets and liabilities of bodies corporate. To this end, they receive information relating to the company in receivership only. They act on behalf of the creditor who called for their appointment.
Personal insolvency Practioners are licensed by the ISI and act on behalf of the debtor. They are only privvy to the information provided to them by the debtor and, on request to the creditors, to pertinent information relating to any loans due by the debtor. Their job is to make the debtor solvent in 5 years.
In the case of Grant Thornton, for example, their PIA department is fully separate from their corporate insolvency dept. As the latter does not deal with personal assets, any information gleaned by the PIA department would be of no use whatsoever to the insolvency department. It is also protected by Chinese walls etc.
You seem to be suggesting that the likes of Grant Thornton would put their entire business at risk to pass details of Johnny O’Briens current account to their CORPORATE INSOLVENCY dept!!!
At some stage, even someone with your sceptical mind has to admit that this is preposterous.
As for having a dog … I have none, I voluntarily help mortgage holders negotiate with lenders. You’d be shocked how many people take bad advice from poorly informed conspiracy theorists.

Statutory instrument 209 of 2013 – personal insolvency act 2012 (Authorisation & Supervision of personal insolvency practitioners) regulations 2013.
Section 9 covers disclosure of conflict of interest.

Fair play to you Mjhint.
Best of luck to you.
I wish every distressed borrower in Ireland had the money to avail of England’s solution to yet another of Ireland’s problems.

Chinese walls Dusty?
What about the sole PIP’s on the list who also act as receivers for our banks?
Do they have interchangeable heads?

If I needed someone to negotiate with a bank Dusty.
I’m afraid I wouldn’t be using your “voluntary” services.
Most people who are in mortgage distress have been there 3-4-5-6 years now,
is it really necessary for them to serve another 3-5-7 years under this banker penned “New Insolvency Legislation” that (based on your comments) you willingly accept and defend??
Whilst under government approval the real villains/culprits in this travesty are being rewarded from the pockets of their victims?
This legislation does nothing but vilify and punish the victims as it rewards their abusers.

These dirty bankers seem very happy to force decent, innocent, hardworking people take the Fiachra Daly option on a daily basis.

Being in mortgage arrears does not give a corrupt banker the right to torment you into a noose with their dirty tricks, ignorance, amateurism, and vile shenanigans.

Sole PIPs don’t act as receivers I pointed that out to you earlier. You’re referring to fixed price receivers/rent receivers who, in Ireland are estate agents or chartered surveyors. PIPs on the other hand are accountants, solicitors and financial advisors.

You’ve moved away from debate and towards populist waffle now I’m afraid. Regardless of the rights and wrongs, the fact remains that, you are fully liable for the full balance of your mortgage and will continue to be even after the property is sold, surrendered or repossessed. You can rage against the machine all you like but if you don’t work within the system you will remain indebted forever (not saying I agree, just the reality). For the record, I help people for free and, I would refuse your case of it came to me as nothing can be accomplished without a degree of realism. Pps – rent receivers can only be appointed over investment properties. A receiver CANNOT BE APPOINTED OVER A FAMILY HOME IN IRELAND.

Moved away from the debate Dusty O’Brien?
You have said above
“In relation to point(1) – could you name me one of the 52 PIPs currently licensed in the country who also acts as receiver for a bank. If you do, I would happily fully address all your other points … I could make a hefty bet that you won’t name one. In that case, we may draw our on conclusions I guess”
I have named them.
God help the people that you “help”.
With your vague toothless words.

The facts are that PIP’s work as receivers for the banks, they do not disclose this fact to their customers until asked.
This is from first hand experience and not from quoting this act and that.
I think that you should ring around a few of your PIP buddies before you go defending them so blindly.
This “New Insolvency legislation” was basically penned by the banks and rubber stamped by their hand maidens in government.
Are you a mortgage broker or “financial adviser” whose business is a tad bit quiet at the moment, Dusty?

“Sole PIPs don’t act as receivers I pointed that out to you earlier. You’re referring to fixed price receivers/rent receivers who, in Ireland are estate agents or chartered surveyors. PIPs on the other hand are accountants, solicitors and financial advisors”.???

Seriously, what’s that?

Please take this travesty a little more seriously Dusty.

“A receiver CANNOT BE APPOINTED OVER A FAMILY HOME IN IRELAND”????

Please point out where I stated that they could be Dusty?

Genuinely, God help the unfortunate people who you “help” for “free”.
God bless them.

Very basically, you are suggesting that PIPs are not interested in helping debtors at all. That the government, banks, solicitors and accountants of Ireland have conspired to enact legislation, develop a training & licensing system, run examinations & set up a board just to gather information about people struggling with their mortgages so they can pass this to the banks.
You really need to grow up.

I am just stating some facts about this “New Insolvency Legislation” and the PIPs Dusty.
Easy on there.
Don’t get carried away lad.
Next thing you’ll be on the “Illuminati” and Lizard people.
Stay with us Dusty.

Typo
Next thing you’ll be on about the “Illuminati” and Lizard people.

The PIPs are out to make as much money as they can regardless of oversight. The rules look like they are there to restrict entering this business to certain people