As Business DAS is a paper based process there have been delays with the postal service. This has reduced the time creditors and debtors have to take action. Question 5(c): Have you identified any improvements that you consider are necessary to the review process? Total Responses Organisations Only Yes 9 6 No 25 13 N/A 5 4 Comment only 1 1 Total 40 24 Ross & Cromarty CAB English with reference to – “Plain regs.” Question 5(d): If you answered yes to question 5(c) what improvements do you consider are necessary? 5.4 Suggested improvements are summarised as follows: Quicker decisions are needed. There was a general view that greater clarity is needed on how decisions are made, together with plain English being used to communicate decisions. An external body should be considering reviews. Decisions should be on a case by case basis rather than strict rules that may not apply to each case. Decisions, including common reasons for decisions being upheld, should be published to help inform future practice. The DASH system should be updated to incorporate business DAS to help prevent delays, reducing the time creditors and debtors have to take action. Money advisers would like more information on what constitutes a point of law. Case studies in the DAS newsletter or reciprocal visits by advisers to the review team and vice versa would address this. Question 5(e): Do you agree that 14 days is the correct length of time to have to submit a request for a review? Total Responses Organisations Only Yes 14 8 No 21 12 N/A 4 3 Comment only 1 1 Total 40 24 Citizens Advice Scotland adviser focus group felt that 14 days was too short – “Our and this should be extended to 21 days. There was a feeling that there are currently at least 4 different time spans for different aspects of DPP and applying a consistent number of days to as many processes as possible would be helpful.”
As Business DAS is a paper based process there have been delays with the postal service. This has reduced the time creditors and debtors have to take action. Question 5(c): Have you identified any improvements that you consider are necessary to the review process? Total Responses Organisations Only Yes 9 6 No 25 13 N/A 5 4 Comment only 1 1 Total 40 24 Ross & Cromarty CAB – “Plain English with reference to regs.” Question 5(d): If you answered yes to question 5(c) what improvements do you consider are necessary? 5.4 Suggested improvements are summarised as follows: Quicker decisions are needed. There was a general view that greater clarity is needed on how decisions are made, together with plain English being used to communicate decisions. An external body should be considering reviews. Decisions should be on a case by case basis rather than strict rules that may not apply to each case. Decisions, including common reasons for decisions being upheld, should be published to help inform future practice. The DASH system should be updated to incorporate business DAS to help prevent delays, reducing the time creditors and debtors have to take action. Money advisers would like more information on what constitutes a point of law. Case studies in the DAS newsletter or reciprocal visits by advisers to the review team and vice versa would address this. Question 5(e): Do you agree that 14 days is the correct length of time to have to submit a request for a review? Total Responses Organisations Only Yes 14 8 No 21 12 N/A 4 3 Comment only 1 1 Total 40 24 Citizens Advice Scotland – “Our adviser focus group felt that 14 days was too short and this should be extended to 21 days. There was a feeling that there are currently at least 4 different time spans for different aspects of DPP and applying a consistent number of days to as many processes as possible would be helpful.”
accountant_in_bankruptcy_-_debt_arrangement_scheme_consultation_2016_-_summary_of_responses.docx