lost the house, now they want more money. please help!

kennyboy66_2

sirmonty16 wrote: »

please help!
house was repossessed last year. mortgage was about 136K. mortgages plc sold the house for 136K. now they wany an extra £13,181. is this legal?

Some people on here would not be satisfied until you were in a debtors prison or a workhouse.

What they are doing is both legal and understandable. You really need to see someone like CAB.

It may be that a Individual Voluntary Arrangement or Bankruptcy is the best option for you. Neither should be undertaken lightly but the best course of action will depend on your personal circumstances. It is a shame that you were not aware of this at the beginning of the process.

kennyboy66_2

dunstonh wrote: »

People know the risks when they buy a house.

Really? Sadly I think there are many people who do not fully appreciate all the risks. This is made worse by some shylock lenders who in the past charged a Mortgage Indemnity Guarantee without explaining that the policy is for their benefit not the borrowers.

[Deleted User]

If they knew the risks then they would also understand if they could afford it or not before hand.

People dont understand the risks, the contract or the legal implications. If they did the banks wouldnt be very happy as they would lose there intellectual advantage in enslaving the masses.

Kez100

People don't understand? Well they should take responsibility for the largest financial decision they will (probably) ever make and spend some time finding out then before signing to borrow and repay tens of thousands which sometime will have to be paid back.

I don't relish others being in them same position as we were, but it's the way can be the way the cookie crumbles when you buy property. You have to face facts, be proactive to repay and no doubt learn from the experience.

dunstonh

Really? Sadly I think there are many people who do not fully appreciate all the risks.

It isnt difficult to understand the phrase "YOUR HOME MAY BE REPOSSESSED IF YOU DO NOT KEEP UP REPAYMENTS ON A MORTGAGE".

If they dont understand the risks of borrowing money then perhaps there ought to be a common sense test that needs to be added to applications.

Q1 - You are borrowing £100,000. Which of the following is correct
a - you dont have to pay this money back
b - you have to pay this money back
c - its a gift from a friendly lender for you to blow on Sky tv, 5 takeaways a week and 3 overseas holidays a year.

[Deleted User]

Right you two, I want you to list every statute and common law decision and the logic behind it relating to repossion law and relate every point back to your situation. I want you to list all of the risks of you not being able to pay your mortgage back including the exclusions to any payment protections you have, now I want you to run a monte carlo simulation and give me the chance of that happening and whether this is an acceptable risk given an average risk assessment of teh population and relate this to economic circumstances, trends and defaults.

My point is any one that says they fully understand everything is a liar as plato stated or words to that effect "the greatest knowledge we can know is that we know nothing". If you keep asking why? how? often enough you end up at a dead end pretty rapidly. As I quiz my lawyer friends about law or my doctor friends about medicine it becomes apparent that they dont know very much, yet the general population would consider these people to be experts and assume they know everything.

When I was taken through my buying process I cant ever recall being asked to provide solid evidence of my budgeting skills to be able to afford the property or was it stated explicitally that not only will we have your house but we will take as many other expenses and saddle you with more debt as we like, these expenses will incorperate out profits and other organisations profits have a nice day.

The fact that irresponcible lending makes banks balance sheets look really cool to investors (without the full data behind) and the fact irresponcible lending raises house prices squeezing every penny from those that can afford to pay back and incorperating any right-off in the cost of lending anyway. Leaves them with little incentive to change their policys. What do the banks steal from you by their very system, your working life.

If we had money without credit a house would be little more then a few years wages for most and the economy would be stable. But the usary system causes life time enslavement and causes boom and bust periods in a never ending infinite credit expansion draining exponentially more resourses to feed and requiring more and more work to fulfill in a never ending multinational pyramid selling scheme.

kennyboy66_2

Yant1 wrote: »

Right you two ............quote]

Wasting your time. Whether it is selling dodgy endownments, split capital trusts, worthless MIG's, boiler room shares, 'multi level marketing schemes' you will also get the response Caveat emptor.

kennyboy66_2

dunstonh wrote: »

It isnt difficult to understand the phrase "YOUR HOME MAY BE REPOSSESSED IF YOU DO NOT KEEP UP REPAYMENTS ON A MORTGAGE".

.

I don't think the OP suggested that they did not understand this, however from the question it seems obvious that they are surprised that they owe a further £13k.

Consider those people who had to take Mortgage Indemnity Guarantee out in the last 10 years.

1) How many understand that this gives the borrower no protection at all?

2) How many had this explained to them when getting their mortgage?

As usual lenders had to be "encouraged" to provide borrowers with a written statement of what this policy is for.

Alias_Omega

dunstonh wrote: »

Q1 - You are borrowing £100,000. Which of the following is correct
a - you dont have to pay this money back
b - you have to pay this money back
c - its a gift from a friendly lender for you to blow on Sky tv, 5 takeaways a week and 3 overseas holidays a year.

the answer is C

knowledgeman

Sadly threads like this just show how thick the average uk citizen is

They defaulted, they broke the contract, yet they seem to expect the bank to incur all the costs because of that

If you buy or sell any house there are legal costs, not to mention the additional legal costs to get someone evicted etc and any other costs involved

I personally think its personally legit that these are charged to the responsible party and not the victim ( the bank)

As for blaming complex agreements etc, its irrelevent here, the OP failed to meet their obligations and had to repay the money and the costs involved in that

Perfectly reasonable and obvious to anyone with any sort of intelligence