Anonymised Anti-Money Laundering (AML) case studies, to assist members in reviewing AML policies and procedures, are available on our enforcement notices page – click here.

The practitioner was intending to exercise their power to reject a claim in an IVA where the creditor was known to have exercised a set-off of PPI compensation, but had failed to submit a revised proof, despite having been requested to do so. The amount of set off was unknown, therefore, it was not possible for the practitioner to calculate the revised claimed. What would be the approach of our regulatory committees to such action?

You are unauthorized to view this page.