Nationwide chasing again after 'nearly' six years : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread

I finally handed back the keys to Nationwide for a flat I had in Winchester in Jan '95 after a long running saga with them. Heard nothing further until December '99 when I receivd a demand for approx 32,000 but suggesting a setlement figure of 8,000. Ignored this letter - wondered how they had traced me as I had moved twice since the last forwarding address they had. There was a follow up letter in January 2000 and a telephone conversation when they suggested I made an offer. Politely advisd them that I had nothin to really offer and again ignored them.

In November 2000 I had another letter from their 'Lending Control' Dept advising that they had re-organised and again pursuing the same figure of 32,000 and again offering a reduced settlement of approx 8,000 - offer to remain open for 28 days. I ignored this leter as well as the follow up which arrived in December.

I have now had a rather heavier letter advising they will take 'any action they consider appropriate' to recover the full balance which may include procedings for personal bankruptcy.

I was succesful four years ago in gettng another mortgage as my circumstances had improved dramatically. Naturally I would prefer not to be made bankrupt or lose this house.

Only found this site today and have read many of the questions / responses - very encouraging but also saddening to hear of so many similar cases.

Anybody got any experience with the Nationwide, will they pursue to bankruptcy, etc?

Guess my next step is to write requesting details of their claim, how was property marketed etc.

Any sggestions most appreciated.



-- Guy Eastwood (, January 29, 2001



Sorry to hear about your news.

People will probably have lots of suggestions for you once you start on the process of serving Subject Access Rights notices on Nationwide and any lawyers, debt collectors etc.

The suggestions for what you should do at this stage of Nationwide's shortfall chase are all detailed on this site. So the first thing you should do is read the Repossession section of the site thoroughly. Preferably the whole site but at least the entire Repossession section and really the Q&A board too.

Then begin to do some of the stuff we recommend you do and come back with questions once you start to receive responses from the lender. You'll need plenty of help once you start using your rights as explained on this site and people will be willing to help with suggestions and thoughts.

Good luck,


-- Lee (, January 29, 2001.


When the lender wrote you the 'heavier' letter threatening court action (eg bankruptcy, which is a court-based process) did they place a time limit on your response?

It's just that if the lender (or the lender's lawyers or the lenders' agents) said, or stongly implied, that they would take you to court if you didn't do what they wanted within X days, but then didn't follow through on this threat, then the lender could be on a very sticky wicket. These days Civil Procedure Rules don't encourage this kind of behaviour at all.

-- Eleanor Scott (, January 30, 2001.


Thanks for you input.

Letter was sent from their Recoveries & Lending Control Unit in Norhampton.

Dated 24 January 2001 wording was

''Failure to contact me wwithin 48 hrs will result in the Society taking any action it cnsiders appropriate to recover the full balance.

This may include legal procedings for your personal bankruptcy, which will render you liable for litigation costs incurred plus interest accrued on the debt of 31,870.13 at 'Standard Variable Rate from the date of sale. This action will be taken without any further reference to you.''

Following sites advice I have now sent SRA to Nationwide Head Ofice at Swindon and advised Morthampton of my action.

The point about 'interest' on the debt is interesting (sic). I have no idea when the date of sale was - I handed keys back in Jan / Feb '95. Presume this means the 'real' debt could be much larger. Without interest added I beleive they must have 'given' the flat away some time during 95/96.

Also interesting, again reading the site, is that my original arrears date back to early 1990 - it did take them nearly 5 years to decide they wanted to reposses with me only making sporadic payments to the mortgage account when able to during that period - is this undue delay and therefore negligence?

Thanks again.



-- Guy Eastwood (, January 31, 2001.

Don't run the limitation argument as to whether it is six years twelve years and so on. There are far more valid proven defences to these spurious claims. feel free to contact me on 01889-507394.

in many of these cases it is possible to counterclaim if an order for possession was granted ,on the basis that despite arrears your home could have been unlawfully repossessed on the basis that the arreas had been miscalculated .

-- Carol Riley (, February 05, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ