Six Year Limit Query!greenspun.com : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread
Hi ALL, I just have a query about the six year limit if anyone can help or throw any light on the matter. I am currently in corresponding with the Abbey National via Eversheds. I had my home repossessed April 1993 and it was sold in August of that year. I did not hear anything until March 2001, Evershed were sending letter to my work place, I thought that there had been some mistake as the letter had no details only a IE form and that policy document they send you, so i ingnored them. This was because I've had no dealings with the Abbey National.My Mortgage was with National & Provincial but Abbey took them over. Any way they telephoned my work place which I was not pleased about but I said I would reply if they sent me a letter explaining everything which they did. Basicallly I have been asking them to prove their claim (£15,000 )and feel that they undersold my property like most people I have seen on this website. I have SARNED them and got quite a bit of info but it only goes back to dec 1999. As they did'nt actually make contact with me until July 2001 are they not over the six year limit, I sent a letter some two weeks ago asking for lots more info and also asked them if they abide by the voluntery six year rule but they haven't replied as yet. If anyone could throw any light on all this I would be most grateful for any comments or advice. i really cannot believe how these lenders carry on. best wishes to you all.
-- Moss (email@example.com), September 13, 2001
In my opinion they are barred as they are over the 6 year limit. The agreement CLEARLY states that it is when 'contact' is made although there is a safety net saying that if you knowingly ignored letters then it is from when procedures began.
They will say that it is from when they activated your file - so they could have started in 1999 and done nothing for 2 years. They will never, in my opinion, go to court over this as it would, if they lost, not only make them all look silly but make them lose hundreds of ongoing cases.
Basically they will say they are allowed to recover the money so pay up or else.
To my knowledge there is no case law since thuis agreement to go on so rrad the CML agreement on their site and quote sections directly in your letters. It is up to them to show they are abiding by it.
-- Matt (Mattyc@ntlworld.com), September 13, 2001.
thanks for your comments, after reading the SARN that they sent it looks as if they activated the file in december 1999 just before the CML meeting, then sent a letter to an old address february 04 but this was to an old address so i did'nt get that one. they then started sending letters to my workplace as I mentioned above
-- moss (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 13, 2001.
It is up to them to PROVE that these letters were sent not only to an address when you lived but were actually received by you. If they cannot I beleive their case crumbles otherwise all they need to do is send a letter off to any old address and bingo 'contact' has been made.
Were you on the electoral register etc and have you had steady employment and banking since - if so what is their problem in finding the correct address. I could do it if I wanted.
-- Matt (email@example.com), September 14, 2001.
The National& Provincial would have had no real problem contacting me as i was on the electoral register and was in the same employment. I am sure that if they had wanted to contact me they would have found it very easy,after all I wasn't hiding I had no idea that they would be chasing me.They actually made real contact by phone and by letter the following day 7 years after the repossession. thanks again for your coment they are much appreciated.
-- Moss (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 14, 2001.