[ Post New Message | Post Reply to this One | Send Private Email to M Amos | Help ]

Response to MIG POLICIES AND TODAYS FSA RULING

from M Amos (idgroms@hotmail.com)
A very helpful solicitor recently sent me the following which might be useful in preparing a defence (in relation to MIGS). The second para may be useful in cases where the lender has lost or refuses to produce MIG docs. Of course, please check this out with your own legal adviser. I have also been advised of the possibility of making a possible undervalue claim/counterclaim in cases where it is asserted that the claim is time barred, and where the lender has not made any attempt to inform the borrower of the sale price, or where a SARN has disclosed that the lender made no attempt to contact the borrower. It is uncertain, though, whether it has been tested in court. I'll post more on this later. Solicitor's info follows:

The defendant denies liability for the claim in that he/she was sold an insurance policy for the sum of £xxxx which was represented by the claimant's employee, Mr/s Xyz, as being for the defendant's benefit insofar as it would cover his/her liability should he/she default on his/her payments under the mortgage, and that following this misrepresentation, counterclaims for the value of the benefits of the policy, as represented, that is all sums payable under the policy. At no time was the defendant told the policy was for the sole benefit of the claimant and of no benefit to him/her.

In addition and in the alternative, the defendant counterclaims for the sum of £xxxx, being the premium for the insurance policy sold to him/her by the claimant's employee. There is no evidence that such a policy was purchased and the defendant puts the claimant on proof that the policy was in fact purchased.

Mark.

(posted 7716 days ago)

[ Previous | Next ]