A Bradford couple's mortgage debts have more than doubled after they had their home repossessed - seven years ago.

The Abbey National took back the house in East Bowling in 1991 and sold it two years later, leaving Pauline and James Kirk with £14, 280 to pay.

But they have now been told they owe £33,000 - including more than £16,000 of interest on the outstanding amount.

Their case has been taken up by Bradford South MP Gerry Sutcliffe, who is pressing for a change in the law.

And the Abbey National has supported the MP's actions and promised to do what it can to reduce the couple's debt.

The problems began when Mr Kirk lost his job and the couple realised they would not be able to keep up payments on their £40,030 endowment mortgage.

They told the Abbey National and their home was repossessed in January, 1991 and sold two years later for £25,750, leaving the £14,280 shortfall.

But the couple did not know it had been sold or for how much.

"We heard nothing from them for six years and we thought the debt was wiped out," Mrs Kirk said.

"No-one told us the time period was 12 years for mortgage debts."

The couple are now facing a bill for £33,000 - including more than £900 for repairs to the house while it was empty.

"I just don't know what we are going to do," she said.

"How could they charge us for repairs to a house we no longer owned and had no access to because they had the keys? And why did they take two years to sell it?

"It was a lovely house when we left it but it was broken into and vandalised between them repossessing it and selling it."

The bill facing the couple includes more than £3,000 in other charges including insurances, sales costs and administration fees.

Mrs Kirk, 47, said: "I was just speechless when I read it - I wanted to commit murder.

"There must be other people in the situation where their house has been repossessed and they don't know about being liable for 12 years.

"At the end of the day we can't afford £33,000 - I've lost three stone and it's made me ill."

Mr Sutcliffe said: "We have written to Consumer Affairs Minister Nigel Griffiths asking him to look at the law with a view to reducing the time period.

"I think 12 years is too long and it is a deplorable situation for a family in real difficulty to be in, especially when they initiated the whole thing."

Solicitor Roger Seddon, of Bradford firm Gouldsborough Couch and Hicks, said the couple were still liable because, under the Limitations Act of 1980, a building society had 12 years in which to bring legal action against a debt on a mortgage based on a deed.

"Obviously if the house gets sold for less than the mortgage, the interest will continue to run on that shortfall.

"It is very unfair for someone in these circumstances and it's unfortunate, to say the least, that they were not advised that all this was a possibility at the time they surrendered possession."

An Abbey National spokesman said a financial investigation firm was hired to trace the couple.

"We didn't have any contact with them for several years and without having the opportunity to talk to them, we are legally bound to pursue them for the whole amount.

"But we would like to reassure them that we wouldn't necessarily want this whole large sum.

"We will be flexible and understanding when seeking to negotiate an amicable settlements in the interests of both parties.

"It isn't our intention to impoverish borrowers when pursuing the recovery of a mortgage debt."

She said that, because of the market conditions at the time, the initial asking price of £36,950 had to be dropped several times because the house did not sell.

Talking about Bradford South MP Gerry Sutcliffe's move the get the 12-year rule changed, she said: "In the light of this case we feel it is appropriate for Mr Sutcliffe to ask for a review of the law as it applies in these circumstances."

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.