Whilst I believe we have one of the fairest regimes for dealing with unsustainable debt, it is clear that no regime can be perfect for both the debtor and the creditors.
There are still real issues with the legislation, which I have highlighted on this forum previously. One of the big issues is that some PIPs are not authorised to implement informal schemes, and therefore they "force" debtors to down what can be a costly and stressful PIA/DSA route, which can lack the flexibility of an informal scheme.
As a firm, we have, unfortunately, encountered scenarios where creditors have tried to impose conditions in a PIA/DSA that would lead to its failure in due course.
As a firm, we will initially try, in most cases, to do an informal scheme. If the creditors try and impose unreasonable conditions, then we can sign off on a PIP letter to support a bankruptcy application if necessary, safe in the knowledge that the creditors were being unreasonable in their conditions.
A PIA/DSA can incorporate provisions dealing with short term illness or loss of work. In addition, a PIP can "vary" the proposals if there are material changes in the debtor's circumstances.
In conclusion, whilst the Irish regime can be improved (specifically by allowing all PIPs to do informal schemes and lifting the €3 million cap on PIAs) it is a regime that works for many debtors.
Jim Stafford