I found this on www.debtquestions.co.uk too, I thought it worth posting up.

Warning: You should make sure that your full and final settlement offer has dealt with the whole shortfall and you do not still owe money to an insurance company for the amount paid out under any mortgage indemnity insurance.

-- M Amos (idgroms@hotmail.com), November 18, 2002

Answers

I had a conversation with a lawyer friend of mine over the weekend. He mentioned that someone in his practice is dealing with a client who "settled" with the Halifax several years ago for a substantially higher amount than we are seeing on this site. All well and good, the client got on with her life, recently married and bought a new house in Hertfordshire. The MIG Co (RSA) have crawled out from under their stone and are claiming the MIG payout they made to the Halifax from 10 years ago. They claim that unless they agreed to the original settlement as full and final and binding to all interested parties, i.e. that the the MIG company became a party to the settlement agreement at the time it was made, they are not bound by its terms and will pursue any monies owed to them under Rights of Subrogration "independently" and "vigorously". This seems to concur with what you have posted and the 12 year limit they are claiming. My friend will mention this site to his colleague, as I said it would be an interesting one for us to follow. He is not, however, optimistic that the client has any recourse.

-- Too scared to say (iwasduped@yahoo.com), November 19, 2002.

I found this on www.insolvencyhelpline.co.uk too, I thought it worth posting up.

Warning: You should make sure that your full and final settlement offer has dealt with the whole shortfall and you do not still owe money to an insurance company for the amount paid out under any mortgage indemnity insurance.

-- M Amos (idgroms@hotmail.com), November 18, 2002

Answers I had a conversation with a lawyer friend of mine over the weekend. He mentioned that someone in his practice is dealing with a client who "settled" with the Halifax several years ago for a substantially higher amount than we are seeing on this site. All well and good, the client got on with her life, recently married and bought a new house in Hertfordshire. The MIG Co (RSA) have crawled out from under their stone and are claiming the MIG payout they made to the Halifax from 10 years ago. They claim that unless they agreed to the original settlement as full and final and binding to all interested parties, i.e. that the the MIG company became a party to the settlement agreement at the time it was made, they are not bound by its terms and will pursue any monies owed to them under Rights of Subrogration "independently" and "vigorously". This seems to concur with what you have posted and the 12 year limit they are claiming. My friend will mention this site to his colleague, as I said it would be an interesting one for us to follow. He is not, however, optimistic that the client has any recourse.

-- Too scared to say (iwasduped@yahoo.com), November 19, 2002.

-- M Amos (igroms@hotmail.com), August 25, 2003.