ABBEY NATIONAL - SARN INFOgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread
I'm wading through the hundreds of pages the Abbey have sent me as a result of a SARN.
I've noticed that various computer generated printouts have fields where the response area is blacked out.
For example a page giving details of the Valuer, details a price for "Suggested Auction Reserve" but leaves areas like "Suggested Asking Price " blacked out as well as other info.
This document was created on 16 March 98 and states that the house was valued on 09 March 98 (days after it was reposessed). Is it usual for a Building Society to consider auctioning a house so early??
Also the Abbey have told me in a subsequent letter that they decided to put the house up for auction 15 weeks after reposession. They say they placed two ads in the first 8 weeks, with two prospective buyers viewing but not buying. Between weeks 8 and 15 they "marketed" it and having got no response they decided at week 15 to austion it. But an offer was received just before it went to auction. Am I reading too much in to this?
They say the "ads" no longer exist and that they cannot advise the dates of the 2 views.
The Abbey have also given me a copy of a report detailing 3 house sales they used as "comparibles" to estimate the price my house was likely to achieve. Now this I find strange as one of the houses they have quoted is actually my house address, and the date of the sale is a month after I bought it in 1991! I owned the house on the date they quote it was sold and I continued to own it until several years later!!
So do I assume this info has been "made Up" for my benefit??? Are they that stupid (or is it me??)
-- too scared to say (Anderston828@ao.com), August 24, 2002
One thing I have learnt over the past 11 years: never ever underestimate the stupidity of mortgage lenders. It sounds like you should ask exactly how they use the "comparibles" to calculate an estimated price.
-- Melody (email@example.com), August 25, 2002.
SARN INFO - SALE COMPARABLES
I may have mad a bit of progress with this and thought I wouls share it just in cas it would help anyone else.
As I previously mentioned the Abbey quoted various house sale comparables in the sarn info. They gave the prices the houses were on the market for but didn't say exactly what the sold for.
I took one of the addresses, logged on to 192.com and got the name of the current residents. Unfortunately not phone number was given and I no longer live anywhere near the area. So, then I loged on to Friend Re United and did a name search. I checked everyone with the same name's personal details and from this came across someone whom I thought might be the same person. I sent him an e mail and asked for some help. He has replied wanting more info and now I'm just hoping he will tell me what he bought his house for. The house he bought was exactly the same as mine in the same street.
Fingers crossed, if I get this info I can use it to demonstrate how the Abbey are at the Hookery Pookery!
Will keep you posted.
PS as someone mentioned if you check any address etc on 192.com the person you are checking can check to see if anyone is checking them! But it's not illegal of course, just the data protection act doing it's bit.
-- not as scared as I was! (Anderston828@aol.com), August 25, 2002.
I got a very supportive and positive response from the guy who bought the house the same as mine, at the same time my house was sold.
He paid a few thousand more than mine was sold for. My own house also had various improvements ie; £10,000 consrvatory and prof landscaping. I know the conservatory wouldn't add on the full £10,000 but even if it added half that amount I reckon I now have some proof of the Abbey underselling.
-- too scared to say (Anderston828@aol.com), August 25, 2002.
I think that the Abbey have to be able to substantiate that they made reasonable efforts to obtain a fair market value for the property. It is not a defence on their part to say that the ads are no longer available. Presumably you were charged for the cost of sale, including agents fees - ie the cost of marketing - therefore, if you are paying for these services you should be able to see how they are derived - and if there is nothing to substantiate the costs you can also reject those. What about a SARN on the estate agents? As I understand it you can pursue the agents as well as the Abbey if you believe that they did not exercise a duty of care. I would certainly ask them to justify the price and insist that they produce evidence of these alleged marketing activities. If they can't demonstrate that they undertook the actions they claimed then that has to undermine their position. For example, what action did the Abbey take when accepting the agents bill to check that the agent had carried out what it claimed to have done?
-- Rick (Ducatiric@yahoo.co.uk), September 04, 2002.