RENTING? Check your LL has permission to let that property.

Premier_2

Why not just introduce legislation allowing all LL to be shot on sight? I'm sure many tenants would welcome such legislation too :rolleyes:

What with property being theft. Think about it no rents required to be paid. Think of the Housing Benefit payments that could be saved - that'll pay for the 2.5% drop in VAT and more, so no debts for the next generation to pick up.

Meanwhile, back on planet earth... :cool:

Premier_2

franklee wrote: »

Even mortgage advisers ask for this "rocking horse poo":

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=85583

"The mortgage advisor from the Abbey (where my own mortgage is) requires us to prove consent to let, and also proof of tenancy, in order that I can prove an income."

Funny how so many are asking for something that's allegedly unobtainable.

Just goes to show, don't take as gospel what people post on internet forums.
(or how difficult it is to get the staff these days)

What kind of lender has lent money and doesn't know the terms under which they themselves lent it?

franklee

socrates wrote: »

"Franklee" speaking this is such a round about way of doing things - that I would rather have another tenant.

I would never give a letter to any tenant to authorise them to do anything with my mortgage company or anything else!

I cannot believe any LL would!

Oh maybe perhaps Miss Money Penny would and probably you Franklee!

I agree it's not a good way but what else is there if a landlord cannot obtain anything from the lender to prove he has consent to let why should a tenant believe there is consent? Frankly I cannot believe that a landlord doesn't have or could obtain something suitable to show a tenant or agent.

And yes if I had doubts about this I would write to the lender, in fact I already did that in the past.

silvercar

franklee wrote:

Otherwise if you have no proof of consent to let from the lender how do you even know you have it never mind the tenant? A golden rule of business is to get important things confirmed in writing.

I have loads of letters headed "BTL mortgage, amount XX, term 20 yrs"

Just nothing that confirms the BTL status with insufficient detail to show a tenant.

Its all largely irrelevant; many LLs have other businesses on which they have given personal guarantees. If the business collapses, owing the bank money, the bank will come looking for assets of the LL. They could then easily get a charge on the LLs property and could therefore move to sieze it, regardless of the correct BTL mortgage, regardless of tenant's rights under an AST to which the bank is not party.

Premier_2

franklee wrote: »

...And yes if I had doubts about this I would write to the lender, in fact I already did that in the past.

And what did you get back?

Name & shame those lenders that have breached the data protection act and/ or care of customer confidentiality here :-

(Hope you still have the evidence as I wouldn't want to see you the subject of any libel action)

franklee

Premier wrote: »

And what did you get back?

Name & shame those lenders that have breached the data protection act and/ or care of customer confidentiality here :-

(Hope you still have the evidence as I wouldn't want to see you the subject of any libel action)

I already mentioned that earlier in the thread. I got a thanks we'll investigate back. Obviously I didn't get any details nor did I expect to. My email to the lender stated address of property, landlord's name and rent. Don't see any breach of data protection there. I was giving out information not expecting to receive any back.

Earlier post:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=17718037&postcount=56
Course I did email the lender and they emailed back a thanks they would look into it. Obviously I was not party to what if anything happened.

franklee

silvercar wrote: »

I have loads of letters headed "BTL mortgage, amount XX, term 20 yrs"

Just nothing that confirms the BTL status with insufficient detail to show a tenant.

Its all largely irrelevant; many LLs have other businesses on which they have given personal guarantees. If the business collapses, owing the bank money, the bank will come looking for assets of the LL. They could then easily get a charge on the LLs property and could therefore move to sieze it, regardless of the correct BTL mortgage, regardless of tenant's rights under an AST to which the bank is not party.

Well if the headings say it's a BTL mortgage wouldn't that it itself do. I'd be happy with some indication it's a BTL mortgage, would you be happy to show a tenant something like that?

For the other point the tenant will be able to see from the land registry entry if there are other charges and if so perhaps avoid that property. So it's really just the mortgage that I'm interested in. It really does seem landlords here do not wish to co-operate on this issue of consent to let. I wonder why. (If the tenancy pre-dates the mortgage (and presumably other charges) then the tenancy holds in any case but of course any notice the tenancy agreement allows for can still be given).

franklee

Premier wrote: »

Just goes to show, don't take as gospel what people post on internet forums.
(or how difficult it is to get the staff these days)

What kind of lender has lent money and doesn't know the terms under which they themselves lent it?

Presumably the kind of lender that gives out consent to let or a BTL mortgage and then isn't able to confirm to those very same customers that they have consent to let :rotfl: Perhaps the lender forgets :rotfl:

carolt

So it's only hearsay that proof of consent can be required, eh? :rolleyes: What about this in today's Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/4269824/Buy-to-let-Warning-for-accidental-landlords.html

"If you decide to go ahead and rent out your property, your first step should be to inform your mortgage lender. "If you fail to do this, you are in breach of the mortgage contract," Ms Bien says. "Theoretically, if the lender finds out, it could insist that you repay the mortgage because you have broken that contract." Many corporate tenants will insist that you provide proof of your lender's consent before signing a contract."

TJ27

Well of course a tenant can require it. A tenant can demand that the landlord dances naked around a pole at midnight before signing a contract if he wants to. Whether a landlord does so is another matter. But in this climate, unless he wants a void, he'd be daft to refuse. (The proof that is, not the dancing.... No, actually, in this climate the dancing bit too.)