Response to MIG Claims

A thought: (again based on written info from solictors/lenders and my experience of this area). The MIG Rights of Sub pass to the lender (NOT the insurance co, who basically factorise the debt back to the Lender) under clause XYZ. The MIG pays the Lender but under the terms of the MIG the Lender is obliged to chase the debt and pass any recoveries onto the Insurance Co at an agreed % rate. The Lender has 6 years (based on my understanding of the Law) to chase you under the Rights of Sub it acquires....BUT it has 12 concurrent years to chase you as the provider of the Mortgage. The problem is, I think that the Rights of Sub and the Lenders rights are interchangeable (only sight of a MIG will prove me right here) so that either/or can chase you for the full 12 years. It may be why after so many years, people are hearing from the Insurance Co - i.e. the Lender has reverted the debt and passed the remaining time back to the Insurance Co. This action may stem from accounting necessity, as some may need write-off's for tax purposes (such as centralised lenders who came unstuck (sob sob..NOT). What we need is proof that they are indeed up to dirty tricks in this way. The write-off's are detailed as Notes to the Accounts (Financial Accounts) but will not be broken down by debtor. Shame that..as a little cross-casting to the Insurance Co accounts would rather prove my theory wouldn't it?

[ Previous | Next ]