Getting permission to let out house...

Money777

Hi,

I have lived in my house for 2 yrs but at the end of August I remortgaged. At the time the broker told me 99% of lenders agree to you letting your house out ( I know he wanted it to go thro but...). However when I rang Abbey to ask for permission they said No, not until I'v had their mortgage for 6 months! Letting agents I'v spoken to have said they've never heard of this... have you??

The problem I have is I have booked to go travelling for 6 months in Jan and can't cancel. I was hoping to let out the house from now as I have moved back in with mum and dad.

One agent told me just to let it out now and then get the permission in 6 months and risk it for now. He said loads of people do it and it will be fine.

Thing I'm worried about is the insurance for having tenants... won't they want proof that I have permission? and say it did burn to the ground , would I be covered?

Can I have lodgers in there and go away for 6 months???

Please any advice/ideas as I am really paniking! :eek:

Money777

Please... any advice???

scrummy_mummy_2

I am confident that the lender is not allowed to unreasonably withold permission for the property to be let due to personal circumstances such as a move etc, and cannot 'insist' it is remortgaged onto a buy to let product either as it is a temporary situation that you can't really account for.
I woul (I know they haven't said this but they often try this on!)

Don't 'risk it' because any insurances you have will be invalid if the house does burn down as you don't have your lender's permission! A decent letting agent should also request proof from a landlord that they do, indeed, have their lender's permission to let before taking on the property.

You can't have 'lodgers' because you would need to let the property on a tenancy agreement and thus they would be tenants....the lodging situation would only work if you allowed friends to move in and share/look after the house whilst you were away (I did this for 4 months on a temporary work relocation and thus did not require letting permission from the lender because it was still my home and there was only an informal verbal arrangement), but this obviously wouldn't wash if you were clearly 'letting' it through an agent!

My advice would be to talk to the building society ombudsman and see what they say then go back to the Abbey and advise them what the ombudsman's position/advice is...you might need to kick off a formal complaint with the Abbey initially and then continue with the ombudsman if they fail to resolve it...but call the ombudsman first to see where you stand.
You might also find it useful to surf some of the financial boards here or on www.fool.co.uk and get some advice specifically about what building scoieties can and can't actually do in you case.

This is a link to the ombudsman.
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/about/index.html

Don't take it though...fight.

silvercar

I am confident that the lender is not allowed to unreasonably withold permission for the property to be let due to personal circumstances such as a move etc, and cannot 'insist' it is remortgaged onto a buy to let product either as it is a temporary situation that you can't really account for.

Lenders can and do refuse to give permission. They can't insist you remortgage but they can refuse permission.

Don't 'risk it' because any insurances you have will be invalid if the house does burn down as you don't have your lender's permission!

Rubbish. As long as you got insurance that allowed for tenants, the permission is irrelevant . You need landlords building insurance.

You can't have 'lodgers' because you would need to let the property on a tenancy agreement and thus they would be tenants....the lodging situation would only work if you allowed friends to move in and share/look after the house whilst you were away (I did this for 4 months on a temporary work relocation and thus did not require letting permission from the lender because it was still my home and there was only an informal verbal arrangement),

If you are not living in the property and they have the run of the whole property they are tenants. If they live with the landlord they are lodgers. Tenants have far more rights than lodgers.

Thrugelmir

A reputable letting agent would require evidence that you the lenders permission.

Money777

Thanks for replies. Any other views??

PayDay

scrummy_mummy wrote: »

I am confident that the lender is not allowed to unreasonably withold permission for the property to be let due to personal circumstances such as a move etc,

Not sure what their stance would be on someone who took out a residential mortgage, but knew they were going to let the house. As in this case, where a residential mortgage was taken out and just a few days later they had already moved out of the property and wanted to let it out.

scrummy_mummy wrote: »

Don't 'risk it' because any insurances you have will be invalid if the house does burn down as you don't have your lender's permission! A decent letting agent should also request proof from a landlord that they do, indeed, have their lender's permission to let before taking on the property.

Agreed. Getting the insurance is not the problem, but getting the insurers to pay out on a claim, is.