![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Fotolia_127489295_XS.jpg\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nCreditor A: \u00a340,000
\nCreditor B: \u00a326,000
\nCreditor C: \u00a314,000
\nCreditor D: \u00a38,000
\nCreditor E: \u00a35,000
\nCreditor F: \u00a34,000
\nCreditor G: \u00a32,000
\nCreditor H: \u00a31,000<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Suppose that only creditor H chooses to vote and accepts the \nproposal, then that decision is binding on all other creditors \u2013 that is\n 100% acceptance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Suppose creditor B votes to reject the proposal with all other \ncreditors voting to accept it, then the proposal is rejected as only 74%\n voted to accept it and the decision is binding on all creditors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Suppose creditor E votes to accept the proposal and creditor H votes \nto reject it and none of the other creditors cast a vote, then the \nproposal is accepted \u2013 that is over 83% acceptance \u2013 and the decision is\n binding on all creditors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Finally suppose creditors A & B vote to accept the proposal and all other creditors vote to reject it, then the proposal is accepted \u2013 that is 76% acceptance \u2013 and the decision is binding on all creditors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Obviously there are many other possible voting scenarios in this \nexample case. Everything depends on whether creditors choose to vote, on\n what their relative voting strengths are and of course on how they \nchoose to vote. The nominee is responsible for summoning creditors to \nthe meeting of creditors but even a creditor who has not received notice\n of the meeting is still bound by its decision. However a creditor who \ndid not receive notice of the meeting may challenge the decision of the \nmeeting on one of two grounds: that the approved IVA unfairly prejudices\n their interests or that there has been some material irregularity at or\n in relation to the meeting of creditors. There are time limits for a \ncreditor to make such a challenge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Creditors frequently propose modifications to a debtor\u2019s IVA \nproposal. Many such modifications are intended to increase the estimated\n dividend to creditors. They may for example require the debtor to make \nhigher monthly payments than originally proposed or to contribute a lump\n sum from for example the release of equity from re-mortgaging a \nproperty. The debtor may choose to accept such modifications, to suggest\n alternatives to the modifications or to refuse to agree to some or all \nof them, usually giving reasons why they are not acceptable. The \nchairman of the meeting will discuss the debtor\u2019s response to \nmodifications with the creditors and creditors may choose to alter or \neven remove the modifications, where the debtor has made a compelling \ncase. However, if the debtor refuses point blank to accept the \nmodifications, then the proposal is usually rejected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The final choice open to creditors is straightforward rejection of \nthe debtor\u2019s proposal. Why creditors should so choose is not within the \nscope of this article but given that they did provide credit to the \ndebtor, it is their prerogative under the insolvency legislation to \nreject what they may believe to be an inadequate attempt at repayment, \nprovided that their decision is made in compliance with the principles \nof treating their customer fairly.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Creditors have three choices when they meet to decide on a debtor\u2019s IVA. Their first choice is to accept the proposal as it stands.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"none","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2754","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-iva-articles"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2754","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2754"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2754\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2790,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2754\/revisions\/2790"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2754"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2754"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2754"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}