Citibank and 2nd charge on property/MIG : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread

Story so far:

House purchased with husband,now ex in 1989. 38k 1st mortgage with Commercial Union (as was) and 2nd mortgage with Citibank in the amount of 22k. MIG paid to Citibank.

House repo'd approx 1992, last mortgage payment possibly late 91 or early 92, not sure.

1st mortgage paid off by selling of the house but 2nd mortgage shortfall of approx 28k, including charges etc.

Recd initial letter of claim from PSPC No1 back about 6 years ago now, requested documentary evidence in support and they couldnt/wouldnt provide it. Then debt sold to Asset Recovery, again nothing heard when ignored and now I have had an e-mail from my ex to say he has had a letter from Lawsmiths and wants to know what to do.

If the MIG has paid this debt then does this mean it is now a simple contract and subject to the 6 year limitation?

Possible may be out of time anyway as 12 years could be up this year.

What does a Statutory demand mean, if they serve one why would you have it set aside, does this mean that proceedings have already been issued in respect of the debt ? I know that proceedings took place to repossess but I dont think they have ever issued for the money?

I am slightly confused by all the information that has been given but I have to say its the most informative yet ! My last effort in obtaining advice told me that I would be made bankrupt.

Finally I am now remarried and although not on the mortgage deeds believe that if everything is kept separate then they wont be able to pursue the debt via the house. I have been working part time for the last 6 years, would this be sufficent to prove that I am not contributing ? Especially when paying for the child care and shopping ie 700 a month !

I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks.

-- jane smith (, July 15, 2003


Jane, I am sure there is an issue here over the transfer between Citibank and PSPC No1 Ltd. If I understand it correctly the transfer between the two companies was not completed in such a way that gave PSPC No 1 ownership of the "debt". You need specialist help. Contact NAMV before you do anything, as they may put you in touch with Ahmad Butt who has experience in these cases.

Tell your ex not to acknowelege the debt at this stage.

A Statutory Demand is the first step towards bankruptcy. You have 18 days in which to set it aside, usually used as a threat, but always has to be taken seriously.

NAMV can be contacted on 01889 507394

Hope this helps Jane

-- Jane (, July 16, 2003.

Hi Jane,

Although you say you are not on the deeds of the house are you on the mortgage. If you are it is worth removing your name as this could be proof that you have a beneficial interest in the house, also keep separate accounts and use your partner's account to pay for the household items. Child care is different as this is not connected to the house.

-- Chris (, July 16, 2003.

If you (or your ex)have received a statutory demand you need expert help and you should contact Ahmed Butt as addvised.

If you are being threatened with a statutory demand by might just be scare tactics.

I dont think it will do any harm to SARN all the concerned parties right away and I will e mail a copy of a sarn letter which you should send by recorded delivery.

The advice re keeping everything separate sounds very must do everything you can to make you appear asset - less! Remember your partner has no part of this so you need not reveal anything about his personal assets etc.

Do not acknowlege the debt in any way and/or admit any liability if they contact you. It would be fair to tell your ex the same.

Let us know how you get on!

Good Luck


-- moira (, July 16, 2003.


Not much to add to what has been said already except in answer to your question:

If the MIG has paid this debt then does this mean it is now a simple contract and subject to the 6 year limitation?

Answer: No

It is still 12 years, and the insurance company has the same rights as the lender under the rights of subrogation, i.e. they can chase you for 12 years too.

Be VERY careful not to acknowledge the debt at this late stage and restart the limitation period. If you get someone to resolve this problem for you make sure you write and tell them that you do not want them to acknowledge the alleged debt, and keep a copy of the letter. There have been cases where solicitors and advisers have accidentally acknowledged the debt. In any communications with the lender you should always state that you do not acknowledge the debt, that you dispute it and deny liability. A part payment can also restart the limitation period (see previous postings). Although Ahmed Butt should be well aware of all this. Good Luck.


-- M Amos (, July 16, 2003.

P.S. Ahmed's tel number is in my posting prior to yours under "Advice needed in re po case".


-- M Amos (, July 16, 2003.

Jane, I have been asked to relay this info below to you as your email address is invalid. If you reply to me and it bounces it will be because my hotmail a/c is bursting, so just keep trying, should get it under control soon, I hope.


Jane Do you know if the mortgage with Citibank is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act (CCA)? If it was taken out on or after 1 May 1998 it almost certainly is. If it is regulated, there a number of CCA issues that can sometimes be used to delay or defeat creditors (this includes firms who have bought the debt). The new OFT Debt Collection Guidance may also be of help (see If the agreement is regulated it would be very useful to see a copy. Some secured regulated agreement are unenforceable due to technical errors in the way they are set out. There was a bit about this on Money Box last Saturday - it might be available to listen to again on the net - but they told only part of the story. Also, last week there was an important decision in the House of Lords (highest court in the UK) concerning consumer credit technicalities, and the lenders lost on all the issues (Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, formerly called Wilson v First County Trust). If you haven't got a copy of the original agreement, provided it is regulated - i.e. you took the loan out on or after 1 May 1998, the CCA allows you to demand ac opy from the lender as well as a full statement of account from the start of the loan on payment of a fee of 1.00. Sometimes it is difficult for creditors to come up with these, especially if it is an old debt and it has been assigned. If no copy or atatement of account is forthcoming, under CCA, the debt is totally unenforceable through the courts and you would have a defence to any court claim or statutory demand All of the other advice on the site seems to be sound - especially the advice to contact NAMV and/or Ahmed Butt regarding the assignment, but if the agreement is regulated, it may open up a whole new line of defence against the creditor. If you can confirm the date you entered the loan, we can take it from there, as appropriate.

-- M Amos (, July 17, 2003.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ