Debt collection and legal actiongreenspun.com : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread
My house was repossed in summer 1994,and abbey national 'found' me last April (2000)and I have had various letters from Evershed threatening to take me legal action, but these letters come every few week and no action is taken. Why? I recently offered them £300 in full and final settlement which they refuse and sent me a without predudice letter wanting £1500. I don't have that sum and wrote and offered to pay £0.50 a week, of course they refused and claimed that I misunderstood their letter, and that they wanted £9500 if in installments. No where in the letter was that sum mentioned. As the debt is now over 6 years can they still take legal action against me? The debt is for apx £25000.
-- MYRTO BOLTON (email@example.com), March 24, 2001
Personally, if this was my situation (and if they are within the six years limit of course,) I would find the 1500 pounds and pay it. You have been offered a very good settlement if the actual shortfall is much much higher as you say. I haven't ever seen an offer that came down to such a small amount from such a high one. You are facing years of aggro otherwise, believe me, they don't give up.
-- Too scared to say (firstname.lastname@example.org), March 24, 2001.
They are now outside the 6 year limit as the repossion was in 1994. I am a lone parent with two children and no assets. My brother was willing to lend be £300 but no more. What I need to know is as it will soon be 7 years despite locating me within the 6 year period can they still take legal action against me.
-- MYRTO BOLTON (email@example.com), March 25, 2001.
I believe they can Myrto. This six year limit is a voluntary code of practice and if it was a 1994 repossession and they found you in April 2000, unless the repossession was between January and the date of their letter/contact with you in April, but of 1994 (if you see what I mean), they are just within the limit. I am so sorry for you, I was in the same position with 2 small kids and another on the way, no assets etc etc. My lenders' insurance Co is still after me, despite the fact that my voluntary repossession was in 1991. I tried to fight them for five years and all it did was ruin me and uproot my whole family. This said, had I had access to this brilliant website back then, I am sure it would all be over by now. You would qualify for legal aid wouldn't you? Follow the instructions on this website, but don't fill in ANY of their questionnaires/I&E forms. Tough though it is, you have to face them off now, unless you want to be hounded for over a decade like me and a few others on this site. Everyone says they can't get blood out of a stone, but they can..and do..they have no scruples these people.
-- Too scared to say (firstname.lastname@example.org), March 25, 2001.
Just an observation in reading the above thread. The lender will claim that the voluntary (CML) code gives the six years from the date of sale and not six years from the date of repossession. So if you were contacted just outside of six years from repossesson then the chances are that you *were* contacted within six years of the sale. Once contact is made then they (the lender) have fulfilled their *voluntary obligation* and and now only the Limitation Act applies. Check out the 6 or 12 years area of the repossession section. Eleanor has done a really good job of consolidating the various discussions that have taken place on this subject.
-- Tim Heath (email@example.com), March 25, 2001.
Indeed, don't make the mistake (in my humble opinion) of thinking that the CML's voluntary code supercedes the Limitation Act. The CML code is a useless piece of voluntary tat, whereas the Limitation Act is *law* and has yet to be tested in the Court of Appeal. There is even a suspicion that the CML adopted its voluntary code last year as a cynical piece of 'spin' designed to divert attention from the very real possibility that a lender might lose on the 6/12 issue in the Court of Appeal, especially with regard to some older (pre-1993) mortgage deeds.
It is probably significant, therefore, that Abbey National backed off against the Holmans (see under Repossession, this site); this was a lender's Big Chance to prove in the Court of Appeal that it did have the right to pursue alleged shortfall debts for 12 years.
-- Eleanor Scott (firstname.lastname@example.org), March 27, 2001.
The way I see it you have offered what you can afford they have refused all that is left is off to court. if you can get legal aid you have nothing to loose and all to gain. The courts in this country no longer send people to prison for owing money to these people. and could possibly award a settlement that is reasonable for you after you fill in the courts i&e form not Eversheds.
-- Jon S (email@example.com), April 13, 2001.
how can these people prove that you were contacted? they can only do that if the letter was sent by recorded delivery or if you were contacted by phone.
-- john mcintyre (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 03, 2001.