Response to MIG data and the DPA

My way of thinking is this: if the mortgagor's (us, the repossessee's) were in fact party to the older MIG's, which most of know we were (those signed prior to '93 I think it was) then the issue of rights of subrogation can be looked at yet again. Some of us are still being chased for shortfall's under these rights, years upon years down the line. We can now find out if we could be beneficiaries of these policies if you win - i.e. we finally get to see the MIG. If we were in fact party to/beneficiary of the very contract which allows the rights of subrogation to be exercised (the MIG), we cannot be chased for that proportion. The payout due would be paid by the insurance co to the lender on the mortgagor's behalf. The Lender can't then chase the co-beneficiary (us) to the same contract under Rights of Sub can it? It would essentially be chasing itself. Convoluted I know, but it makes sense to me!

[ Previous | Next ]