CSA Mortgage and Family loan agreement

Kimitatsu

JSB43 wrote: »

No offence, who said anything about charging "interest" and I see nothing that is remotely "fraudulent".

A homneowner has a right to dispose of his property and borrow against it.

Unless you are adqeuately qualified to make such amendments to NRP advice relating to Property Law, why dont you let the OP decide for themselves?

Perhaps you should read my post again......my point is that if you give a proportion of your house to anyone in return for a loan that is a secured loan in its basist form. Whether the lender chooses to charge interest or not is irrelevant, but it is still a secured loan. You give them a charge over your property which can be reclaimed in the event you do not pay it back.

Therefore to do what you two brain boxes are suggesting would mean that the lender in order to make it legal would have to be in posession of a consumer credit licence - that is the law.

The OP cannot do this in order to reduce thier liability to the CSA because it would be an illegal loan and also would be depriving themselves of income for the purposes of the assessment.

I dont think I can make it any more simple

millwall34

if it is a SECURED LOAN then it comes under the consumer credit act......Ive never heard anything so ridiculous!


I bought both my children their homes and I have a security on them. The tenancy contract allows me to charge rent to protect them from predatory spouses.

Roy_G_Biv

Kimitatsu wrote: »

mean that the lender in order to make it legal would have to be in posession of a consumer credit licence - that is the law

So a license is needed for a parent to help a child buy a house by lending the money in return for collateral. This smart alec is as bad as the CSA itself, dictating laws they obviously know nothing about.

Kimitatsu wrote: »

it would be an illegal loan and also would be depriving themselves of income for the purposes of the assessment.

What a load of twaddle. There is no evidence of that so nobody would take any notice. The freeholder doesnt have to tell the CSA why he is chooses to part-buy and part-rent his home. The actual reason is found in his original post. OP said: its incredibly hard at the moment to get a mortgage. How would the CSA infer anything different?

Kimitatsu wrote:

I am sure Roy that you already know if you want to complain you just need to contact abuse - details are in the buttons below, but you may get a female

Closed

Disrupting a thread with snide comments isnt good advice either, only trolls do that. I didnt complain, I deliberately left it there so others can judge MSE for themselves.

Kimitatsu wrote:

if you cannot give good advice then please refrain from giving it at all

You should have your own advice in order before you criticise others. Practice what you preach.

Rorkes_Drift

lmfao, well & truly busted!:beer:

Whats the odds they will copy the CSA. Caught trying to conceal the evidence not realising the nerp has already captured it.

This thread becomes yet another locked deleted NRP thread and its all over youtube. Er, wheres that print-screen key?:rotfl:

kelloggs36

A loan to a member of the family will not be taken into consideration - only a 'proper' lender, ie bank, building society and the like will be allowed for CSA purposes. It doesn't matter who owns the property, if the money came from the family it won't be allowed.

Roy_G_Biv

I think we all agreed on that per #2 above.

This is why its suggested the OP buys the home with a family member as a Tenant in Common owning a fixed share of the property. That way a tenancy agreement on that share is established and the rent counts as housing costs and enables them to join the property ladder by part-owning their own home.

The CSA cannot claim non-dependents because the family member does not live in the property.

I appreciate the OP might fall out with family, but since the CSA already intends to undermine the security of the home plus, any fallout is unlikely to happen. This is afforded by the family member being willing to give them the opportunity in the first place. The OP can make that decision on merit.

One poster seemed to think renting a property is "illegal" but I cant see how. Its good financial planning and an excellent way to get in their own home without a deposit.

kelloggs36

I don't think that would work though as the original loan was with family regardless of what they do with it.

Roy_G_Biv

Thats why I dont think its a good idea to use a loan.

creampuff

Hello all thank you for your posts.

I feel like i have kicked a hornet's nest...

We are not trying to deprive the children of money, we pay a large amount and have done for the last 12 years. We feel that now is the time to finally get out of rented accomodation and finally buy our own home and settle down to have children of our own. unfortnately mortgages are hard to get as due to the very large depositis needed and the CSA don't give you enough disposable income to give you a chance to save, but fortunately we have been offered a family loan to help us on the ladder - nothing fishy about that.

so if we get a loan agreement written by a solicitor and secure it on the house would this not be like getting a loan secured on the house for home improvements which i believe awould be taken into account... (read this on the internet)

creampuff

hi

Also should have added that we have alkready bought the house in our name but need to prove the houing costs to the CSA.