Repossession, a bit harsh?

[mariner2]

I know someone who's house was repossessed even though the cheque for the latest payment had been sent and was held up by the weekend . . . . amazingly the repossession went ahead and they are out of that house which is on the market now.
I'm sure they explored every legal possibility, but, actually, no I'm not . . . . !
Surely that can't be right??

[Ethel]

They would have been in severe arrears, been to court and had a county court judgement against them, the lender would have applied to court for a repossession order.

This is not just one payment delayed by a few days.

[Ethel]

This is the repossession process in the UK
http://www.a-quick-sale.co.uk/repossession/und erstanding/

[gossipgirl]

i personally think the whole repossesion thing is ridiculous. We had lovely neighbours who were hardworking, law abiding, never caused trouble and were raising there family the best way they could, lovely people they were. Only as like many other people they started to struggle with their mortgage payments, and as time went on and numerous attemps to resolve the situation, the bank went on the take the house from them anyway. That house has no stood empty now for 17 months and there is another homeless family on the streets ( ok thats a bit dramatic because there staying with her mother) but never the less where is the sence in that. Surely the bank couldve let them stay and pay what they could rather than have another empty house on the market.

[Ethel]

Why should banks support people who can't afford their debts?
I wouldn't be surprised if that house was sold very quickly to a speculator or company who is now selling it.

People can and should take out mortgage insurance so their debts are met for two years in the case of sickness, accident or redundancy.

If things aren't improved after two years, then the government pays the interest on the mortgage for a while at least. If they don't qualify they are living above their means and have ample time to sell up and move on.