MIGs, RSA and Curtis

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread

Situation: 3rd mortgage payment (Halifax)defaulted 1989. Letters to and from Curtis and recovery agents (seeking to recover MIG for RSA)from 1998 onwards. Debt NOT acknowledged by me. Curtis (on behalf of RSA)saying they may take me to court. I've moved house twice, but why they've waited from 1998 to 2004 is anyone's guess !

Someone has asked this question previously, but I'm still unclear. Does RSA's 12 years start from the date they handed the cash to the Halifax BS ? Or does their claim against me under the MIG start at the same time as the 3rd missed mortgage payment? I'm unsure because I had no contact for years, but there could be months/years between the 2 dates which may be crucial to my defence under Limitations Act.

-- Richard (richardpowell99@hotmail.com), January 30, 2004


Just to clarify my query in case misunderstood. I am definitely outside Limitation period for mortgage, but when does the clock start ticking for the MIG ? And is it 6 or 12 years ????

-- Richard Powell (richardpowell99@hotmail.com), January 30, 2004.


The limiation period for the RSA is the same as for the Halifax, 12 years for principal and 6 years for interest (although when the principal is statute barred, so is any interest that relates to it, even where it accrued within the last 6 years).

When an insurer pays a lender under a MIG policy, it takes on all the rights and obligations of the lender in respect of recovering its pay-out. In effect, it takes over the lender's existing limitation period.

If the 12 years started to run against the Halifax on the third missed payment in 1989, it also started to run against the RSA at the same time.

If you have not acknowledged the debt, and no joint debtor has made any payment, since 1989, the debt is statute barred against both the Halifax and the RSA.

You could write to Curtis: deny liability for the debt, saying that as more than 12 years have passed without acknowledgment or payment, it is statute barred. Ask them to confirm that they will not be pursuing the debt or, alternatively, that they will be providing evidence to show that the debt is not statute barred. Remind them that they have a responsibility to exchange information and documents under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) 'Overriding Objective' and Pre-action Protocol Practice Direction. Also remind them of the provisions of the OFT Debt Collection Guidance in respect of disputed or deadlocked debts.

You can find the OFT Debt Collection Guidance on the web - go to www.oft.gov.uk, then click on 'news and publications', then on 'press releases 2003', and then scroll down to July 14 and 'debt collectors warned'. There is useful stuff relating to disputed or deadlocked debts. There is a little about this on the 'CML again' posting.

Hope this helps


-- Guy Skipwith (guy@skipwith107.freeserve.co.uk), February 03, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ