I had a summary judgment application against me dismissed by the district judge - for an alleged shortfall claim - with the judge being very sympathetic torwards me - the reasons why it was dismissed are the usual suspects - after six years from possession, sold undervalue, MIG etc also the judge stated that it was in the public interest for my case to be heard at a full (fast track) trial - what do I need to do now? any help greatly appreciated.

-- rathernotsay (, October 18, 2001


That's a great win.

You need to get prepared to put forward the same points to fight off Halifax in the next court hearing. Please read the Do's and Don'ts list that is in this site's Repossession section. You need to work on the issues dealt with in the section labelled "What to do after you receive a shortfall claim".

I'd like to have more details of your story - how this summary judgement hearing came about, what arguments Halifax put up, etc. I can't guarantee I'll be able to help - you seem to be doing a pretty good job on your own - but I'll try.


-- Lee (, October 20, 2001.

I suggest you contact Carol Riley at the National Association of Mortgage Victims. She is brilliant!

-- Richard Horsley (, October 18, 2001.

Lee, my story so far (apart from above)

August 1990 took out a joint endowment mortgage with my partner at the time for a £39,950 new flat with the Halifax.

We hadn’t a deposit, but the developer had an arrangement with the Halifax that he set a side “£2,000” of his money so that it will help us in early stages of paying the mortgage the scheme was set up as this: 65% of the £2000 divided by twelve monthly payments came off our first year’s payments, 35% for the second year and the remainder the third year. The Solicitor – was through the developer who told us that we had to take out a MIG policy as we were applying for a 100% mortgage and told us the reason we had to take out this policy was to insure the Halifax against any mortgage shortfall or us defaulting.

When we had the mortgage offer come through it was in my name only but we had it amended for both names.

In the autumn of 1993 my relationship with my partner broke down and she moved out and left me to pay all expenses etc.

I contacted the Halifax to remove her name from the mortgage etc. The Halifax declined.

November 1993 I had no alternative to hand the keys back to Halifax

Did not hear another thing until July 2000, when my new partner and wife received a funny phone call asking information about me. Two weeks later I received a letter from Warner Cranston asking me to contact me regarding an outstanding debt of £34,442.27. !! I ignored this letter.

Got another letter September 2000 Telling me if I do not contact them within 7 days the will consider court proceedings. I wrote back saying there must be a mistake as I was covered under the MIG policy.

Received another letter from the saying I am not privy to the MIG Policy.

Contacted Local Solicitors to act for me.

They started written dialogue with Warner Cranston (WC) requesting copies of various documents WC- still claim I am not privy to MIG and will not release details. My solicitors give me a copy of article from Sunday Times regarding Peter Walker and Concept Management.

After eight months and £1,100 solicitor is no further forward so I dispense with his services.

I write “without prejudice letter” stating to resolve any more stress to my Family I willing to pay a one off payment – and how much would they require.

Receive letter back from WC demanding me to fill in income and expenditure form and return with in seven days or they will consider court proceedings.

I contact Peter Walker of Concept Management (CM) who agrees to act for me.

Through CM I offer an ex-gratia payment of £1,500.

WC writes back and again asks for the income and expenditure form to be returned.

CM writes back and said no.

1 Aug received copy of their county court claim form !!!

-- rathernosay (, October 21, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ