Ghosts when re-applying for a mortgage after repossessiongreenspun.com : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread
My house was repossessed in 1992 after the breakdown of my marriage. I recieved a letter from the Alliance and Leicester for a shortfall settlement for B#18450.21. in February 1995. I asked them for receipts for the amount claimed, for which they replied they were not obligated to provide, so I instructed a solicitor to write to them; I recieved a reply several months later. The receipts did not match the claimed amount. I have scince received no corrispondence from them, and I have not persued it. I now want to apply for another mortage and ask:
a) Is the six year rule enforcable as they contacted me in 1995 although my house was repossessed in 1992? b) could they argue that it is my fault as I did not respond to there letter recieved by my solicitor? c) If I apply for a mortage, will the Alliance and Leicester get to know about it and begin proceedings against me for the B#18450.21.? d) Does the defaulted amount of B#18450.21 ever get writen off?
-- Remain Anonymous (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 12, 2000
In short and simple answers Mr Anonymous, a) No b) Yes c) Yes d) No I am sorry it is not a more positive answer but as you were contacted through your solicitor in '95 they will insist that the 12year rule applies. It is not advisable to try and conceal the existance of a previous mortgage and yes A&L most certainly will apply for the monies owed.As for getting the debt written of my advice to you is, read these pages, they will give you an insight to the fight some people are putting up, how they are dealing with these shortfall debts and the amount of hard work it takes. There is no easy way round it, it takes a lot of time, patience and perseverence. May I suggest that you read the * Who Helps * page. I wish you well. J.
-- jacky jones (email@example.com), November 12, 2000.
You are in an interesting position because if the receipts do not match the amount claimed then how is the A&L going to justify its claim to the judge? And it will have to go to a judge if it wants to try to get a charge on your current house.
A judge might say that even if the receipts don't justify the claim there is some claim but this depends on the facts of the case. The only people who really do have all the facts of the case to hand is the lender and this means you cannot know how big their claim against you really is or if they have a valid claim at all.
The A&L won't naturally find out that you have bought another house but most lenders have dumped their list of shortfall claim victims with tracing companies (or their own tracing departments) who do a computerised credit reference check once a year. They inform the lender or start the chase once they get a match.
What this boils down to is that you fac a risk of being hassled if you do apply for a mortgage (because your request will show up a few months later in your credit records and on the National Hunter database). However, being hassled and losing in court are two different things and you appear to have some evidence that the A&L has been playing fast and lose with its claim numbers.
The safe answer on the six year rule in your case is to wait 12 years before trying to own an expensive asset or to settle with A&L for a couple of grand to get them off your back.l (This latter approach is more problematic than it looks - read the site for details)
My advice would be to rent and save until 12 years has passed.
You have done no wrong by not responding to their letters once you had evidence that their claim was flawed - it is up to them to justify a flawed claim in the courts.
Debts do get written off but you are rarely told about it.
-- Lee (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 12, 2000.