we all have personal stories about our repossesion but put simply govt makes a mess of the economy blah blah blah .........lawyers want #30000 on behalf of their client royal bank of scotland (RBS). i don't think it makes any difference but mine was also a staff mortgage and little did i know at the time written on a repayment basis to my retirement age. As i was 25 at the time the interest payments i subsequently found out were amongst the highest in the market in spite of it being a staff loan.(hows that for misselling!)

Anyway the keys went back to RBS in 1996 i am getting all the heavy pressure threating court action i have offered #300 which i can scrap together from friends and family but they are were simply suggesting #5000 was a realistic figure and not responding to my question "what criteria have they used to decide #5000 is realistic".

i have completed their income forms showing my total income of #96.00pm which is the childrens allowance i recieve clearly i am not able to run the current family home on this i don't work and survive on my husbands generous nature (he says!)

i moved into my husbands home in 1995 and we moved to our current house in 1998. whilst i am noted on the mortgage i have not worked since 1995 and will not be going back to work for some years yet (if ever)

my questions are, now that our current house has equity in the order of #60000 could this be classed as my asset and RBS argue they are entitled to #30000?

I am assuming the debt can not be passed over to my husband as they have not pursued this are we safe to assume if we end up in court they cannot take into account my husband income situation and or his equity in the house?

-- susan noble (rnoble@lfgroup.co.uk), March 14, 2000