Unsecured loan copy of writgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread
I have a 15k unsecured loan with the Royal Bank of Scotland. Through Citizen's Advice I have agreed reduced payments with other creditors, but RBS have refused my offer. Even so, I have made reduced payments of 38.20 (normal payments were 327) every month. I have now been served with a copy of writ through the sheriff court. I am told that because the debt is more than 15k I do not get the opportunity to provide the court with a statement of my financial position. The only thing I can choose is to defend in court, which will cost me #46 plus court fees. I phoned up the Sheriff Court and was told to be aware of these costs and it was clearly implied that there was no point in defending. The amounts the RBS claims against me are probably correct, but how am I to know? Provided that the amounts are correct, should I defend anyway? If I do not defend the decree will be issued against me. If I do defend, so I am told, it will be issued against me as well! Is there any point going into court at all?
Please reply by retrun if possible.
-- Idob (email@example.com), February 18, 2000
I hope that this will answer both your postings.
The RBS will not be repossessing your home. To repossess is to take back something which was loaned, or which was used as a guarantee for a loan - like with mortgages.
Although the Sheriff's office will have told you there is no point in defending - there is every point in defending, because you will have your chance to say something in court.
Prepare yourself with a financial statement to show in court with your income and outgoings. Also have with you copies of all your letters to the RBS and their replies. Take with you (you may want to make up some sort of file) copies of correspondence with other creditors. This way you can show the court that you have tried to come to an arrangement with the RBS and also that other creditors have agreed.
To drop down from #327 a month to #38.20 on a reduced payment is a massive decrease and quite understandably the RBS will not be best pleased that they are not getting their repayments and they are within their rights to try and get their money back.
If the reduced payments are just a temporary measure, then the RBS are really just being bullies - all creditors get like that - they don't like to see reduced payments when you agreed to a certain amount each month - and most will take some persuading. I have been reduced to saying "okay then sue me!" to some to force them into some agreeing and that has usually worked.
The RBS will not necessarily be after your house because its your house, but because it is an asset. #15,000 is a lot of money and most people will not have assets to cover this amount, apart from what equity there is in the home. Do you have equity anywhere near this amount?
Courts are not in the business of making people homeless, but they will listen (hopefully fairly) to both sides. If they are successful and you still cannot agree a payment arrangement with them, then they can try and take your house - but your mortgage lender and any other secured loans will come first. If your mortgage lender has no reason to repossess, then the RBS won't be able to, although they could try and force you into a secured loan with them.
Without further information I can't go any further without many if's and but's but if you want to write to me at firstname.lastname@example.org I will do my best to help further.
-- denise (email@example.com), February 18, 2000.