Respossessed/Letters Sent to Wrong Address : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread

Some time ago my lender issued a summons for repossession, which was not sent to my correspondence address which they had communicated with me at for some number of months (I was not living in the mortgaged property at the time). I found out by sheer fluke by visiting my property and looking at the mail, just in time. I contacted the court and managed to get the hearing adjourned; at the hearing I let the judge know of the poor administration of the lender re: wrong address for correspondence and other factors, wrong amount of arrears logged. The judge made a Suspended Possession Order. I made the payments according to this. However, a few months after the arrears were paid off on this I fell into arrears again. Contact was made with me at my correspondence address which I had made sure the lender had on record, and I have confirmation in writing of this from them. However, I learned four days after my house was repossessed that this had happened, no letters had come to me. On quizzing the lender they said that for three months prior to repossession letters had been sent, but it seems that they still had not got the message and had sent them to the wrong address, or was this deliberate? But it was all too late. I sought legal advice and this was that the lender had gone round the back door to repossess and I may have a case but this would cost alot of money. I served a SARN on the lender and it was amazing that amongst all the bundle of letters going years back the only letters missing were those sent to the wrong address. I queried this and they sent copies but but the addressee bit was missing, i.e. blank. Odd? Contents were in my property and the SARN docs showed a letter had been sent to me at my incorrect address giving me 14 days to collect them.

I am now facing a shortfall claim and feel that in view of the fact that the lender's admin was not just poor but appalling, and that this poor admin denied me the right to clear the arrears at the last moment or to sell myself (letters sent to the wrong address just before repossesion, shown in SARN docs, say that if I paid arrears the warrant for eviction could be stopped). I do feel that at no other time of my life have my human rights been violated so much as ont his occasion. There is not much I can do about the repossession, it has happened. However, I do feel bitter about paying the shortfall. Much of what I owe, that has been added onto my mortgage statement, is fees of 25 per letter for letters that were not even sent to my correct address, despite the fact that I have it in black and white that they had a record of my address, even the legal section. Am I within my rights to deduct such charges from the shortfall claim and even to dispute it due to the backdoor method of repossessing?


-- Tess Green (, November 16, 2002


Who are the lenders andwho is handling their 'Shortfall' Claim. I would keep this ace up your sleeve until you have no option but to throw it in

-- Geoff Winters (, November 17, 2002.

Thanks for your reply Geoff. Not sure if I should divulge the lender and shortfall handler at this stage, in case I throw away the ace!! Do you really think this is an ace? I have advisors (mentioned on this site, who frankly seem to be encouraging me to play along with all the shortfall handler's demands), and they consider the details (as in my question) irrelevant, and that I am legally liable for the debt and that the factors outlined in my question would not stand up in court. I have a shortfall of 8500 (my property was sold for 8000 below market value) and I have offered 2500, but the shortfall handlers have come back saying that they want 4200 and if I pay this then I will not have to divulge any more details of the income and expenditure that I supplied. I cannot afford 2500, let alone 4200. Could I use my ace combined with sale below market value do you think? Not sure what to do really and I am being pressed for a decision urgently.



-- Tess (, November 18, 2002.


If you can *PROVE* they undersold. Go and have a look at , it makes very interesting reading!


-- One Angry Mother (, November 19, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ