Charles, I would have to agree you gave a very long and complex answer. Not quite sure from your answer which part of the thread you are referring to. My posting was related to the establishment of a starting point. Whether the time in which a lender can chase is 6 or 12 years is irelloevent to my thoughts. I have my own opinions on this, but again this was not the purpose of my point. I feel that if a debt becomes "due in full" under deed (and the lender for arguement sake claims and it is found that this is 12 years) that those 12 years are from date of sustained default and not from repo or sale. My reasoning is that repo and sale are meerly actions taken in order to revover the debt. Just because a lender takes action to recover a debt does not start the clock ticking again. If the lender claims that the time starts from time of shortfall inception then this to me is clearly an indication that this is a new debt. A new debt under simple contract. They can only have their cake and eat it if we let them, though our own ignorance of the issues, or we employ questionable counsel that allows them to do it.(posted 8482 days ago)Regards Tim