Insurer chasing for the whole debt : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread

Wandered if you could help. The loan was from, as on the deed, MAES Finance. But Eagle Star Recoveries are chasing the shortfall, they were the endowment people. Does this mean that they should have chased within 6 years, because the shortfall is not part of the original contract. Or are they intitled to go the whole 12 years because they were 'in bed' with MAES at the outset. Any help or guidance would be appreciated.


Jon S

-- Jon S (, April 12, 2001


The thread "How long does a Lender have to claim on a MIG?" discusses this point, on a theoretical basis at least. Did you pay for a MIG? I assume that the endowment people are also the MIG providers? If not, what are they doing chasing you? Very odd.

-- Too scared to say (, April 12, 2001.

It appears I paid a one off premium of 298 for a MIG cover of 6617.00, hardly a cover at all on a 48,000 house?

Jon S

-- Jon S (, April 13, 2001.


Your case raises many interesting questions.

How do you know that your MIG cover was for the precise sum of 6617? Is this the sum which was claimed by Maes? Have you managed to see some documentation? I take my hat of to any ex borrower who has found a way of seeing their MIG policy and the MIG claim. In my experience, lenders are (suspiciously) reluctant to let ex borrowers see these and have them evaluated by professionals.

I take it that Eagle Star provided the MIG, and, if so, I would love to kow how usual it is for the endowment provider to also supply the MIG.

Anyway, it may well be that 'MIG monies' are subject to a 6 year limitation rather than the 12 year Limitation which applies to mortgages, according to opinions expressed below on this Q&A board (see threads with MIG in title), although these are of course merely opinions. It would be good to have it tested in the Court of Appeal, like many 'shortfall' related issues.

-- Eleanor Scott (, April 13, 2001.

Thank you for your interest. I have been asking for documentation since getting the 'you owe us lots of money' letter. the last letter from Eagle Star states "The Mortgage Indemnity Policy is for Eagle Star's benefit not the borrower. You are not party to this document and you are not entitled to any ammount under it. However, to assist, I enclose a copy of your original mortgage offer which confirms the MIG cover ammounted to 6617. The premium of 298.00 was capitalised to the advance." In the offer it says: "MAES Finance Limited to be indemnified by Eagle Star's Accident Department to the extent of 6617, subject to the payment of 298.00 which will be deducted from the advance or, where requested, will be debited to the loan account on completion" That leads me to the original question 'can the MIG provider chase after the 6 year is up. I would have thought this was a seperate debt from the original mortgage. And why did I waste 298.00 on such a thing in the first place (youth and ignorance are a heady combination which we pay for in later life). This does not appear to be a MIG in the way they have been described elsewhere on this site. Any input would be welcomed.


Jon S

-- Jon S (, April 13, 2001.

Actually your MIG *is* the same, in principle, as everyone else's. The only difference is that Eagle Star, to my knowledge, do not usually provide that type of business which is why it may be limited in it's pay-out. You are in a better position than most as you know what was paid out and when. I believe that you can disregard this [MIG payout] alleged debt after six years - the more I read the more I am convinced of this. The balance cannot also be chased by the insurer if they only paid out six thousand's not their debt to chase unless it has been formally assigned in some way. It would then cease to be specialty and become simple..six year rules apply. This is ONLY my opinion mind you, but it's how I would argue it.

-- Too scared to say (, April 13, 2001.

Thank you for your input, it's what I expected. Eagle Star have been reasonably helpful all along until the MIG came up. I think they also share our opinion that it is all a bit slim but I guess they have their job to do also. I believe the only recourse for myself now is a 'put up or shut up' letter. My only hesitation is to drag it out to October and serve another SARN to get the paper documentation from them. Just to give you the background, they are claiming the shortfall of 24,000 odd and as mentioned in other articles on this site the deeds were not signed, 8 year gap before claiming, and no evidence of the property being valued prior to sale. Still you got to try tobe a bit laid back about it all! Thanks again

Jon S

-- Jon S (, April 14, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ