I read the following in the Electronic Telegraph

"The Halifax is one lender that agrees with this interpretation. It says: "The borrower must respond for contact to be established. If we don't establish contact in this way and the borrower doesn't respond, we would drop the action." This means that Halifax borrowers who were repossessed more than six years ago, and who have received letters from the bank to which they've not responded, should now be safe from pursuit following the implementation of the CML agreement."

Does anyone know What the Brittannia Building Society's policy is with regard to the 6/12 year rule?

Thanks

Graham W.

-- Would rather not say (Private@private.com), August 06, 2000

Answers

This isn't an answer, rather a comment, Graham. The point whicn interests me is the difference (legally, not just semantically) between 'contact' and 'action'. So a person answers a letter. So what? Is that really 'recovery action' on the part of the lender, particularly if the ex-borrowers letter says something in that letter along the lines of, 'please substantiate this claim'? The fact that the lenders are so reticent about the exact definition of the start and end points of the '6 year rule' makes me wonder if they are reluctant to have the point tested in court, especially given the circumstances under which they adopted it. best wishes, E.

-- Eleanor Scott (eleanor.scott@btinternet.com), August 08, 2000.