Would i be in trouble if - I got a FT buyer mortgage and rented out the property??

barnaby-bear

zipwen1 wrote:

the investor that is buying my house will be getting a 100% mortgage and letting it out, and as soon as he dose il be grassing the !!!! up. if you want to make money with property do it the honest way if you cant afford it you shouldn't be doing it

Can I just re-iterate tenants have NO RIGHTS if landlords do this, their tenancy is null and void and they can be evicted virtually instantaneuosly by the mortgage company.

barnaby-bear

thebrow2000 wrote:

Because my company will guarantee to rent the property for two years. They are crying out for rooms to house the influx of migrant workers. The direction we are heading we will need more houses for the workers. East Europeans are harder workers and are gradually replacing migrant workers from other countries.

But won't it make you look bad at work that the let is illegal without HMO certificates, the tenancy worthless without mortgage co. approval and there is no insurance. Not exactly professional for the company to be dealing in such shonkiness with such a shady character. Tenants and neighbours of HMOs often grass such schemes up if the LL plays up or the set up is a bother to anyone.

irnbru_2

thebrow2000 wrote:

Because my company will guarantee to rent the property for two years. They are crying out for rooms to house the influx of migrant workers. The direction we are heading we will need more houses for the workers.

With such a potential requirement, I'm wondering why your company isn't diversifying into residential property itself?

RHemmings

Ivrytwr3 wrote:

How is it illegal? He's breached his mortgage agreement by allowing tenants, nothing more. And if worse comes to worse he can always plead ignorance.

From: http://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/economic-crime/ec-fraud.html

What is fraud?
Fraud is defined as a criminal deception committed by a person who acts in a false and deceitful way. There are a string of offences under a variety of legislation and essentially the suspect will demonstrate some form of dishonesty and/or deception.

olly300

barnaby-bear wrote:

But won't it make you look bad at work that the let is illegal without HMO certificates, the tenancy worthless without mortgage co. approval and there is no insurance. Not exactly professional for the company to be dealing in such shonkiness with such a shady character. Tenants and neighbours of HMOs often grass such schemes up if the LL plays up or the set up is a bother to anyone.

You could actually end up sacked at work for doing this due to it involving other people who work for the same company. While it's none of your employer's business what you do in your spare time if it affects them in any way which it would if you let a property to them without the right to do so and your employer houses other employees in it, then it could be deemed gross misconduct due to it being dishonest and breaking the law.

franklee

barnaby-bear wrote:

I'd probably still shop you when I left for disrespecting me enough to have no tenure and no insurance.

You'd have to be such a good little landlord at my beck and call... here boy here boy.... come fix this, buy the house this... putting tenants in and negating their rights is pretty scummy and tenants don't like finding out this has been done....

Exactly so. It makes a huge difference to how the tenant will be treated in the event the property is repossessed.

As for the shopping, just to make clear this isn't just theoretical, I did get my previous landlord's mortgagee letters (obvious from the outside, not that I opened them) and I did shop him when I left.

barnaby-bear

franklee wrote:

Exactly so. It makes a huge difference to how the tenant will be treated in the event the property is repossessed.

As for the shopping, just to make clear this isn't just theoretical, I did get my previous landlord's mortgagee letters (obvious from the outside, not that I opened them) and I did shop him when I left.

Yeah I shopped a landlord, basically because he was a t&sser and was slow at repairs, but I waited until he'd got new tenants in, so when they added an extra 1% on the mortgage he couldn't pass it on for another year and hadn't budgeted. I enjoyed that. :T

zag2me

Loads of people do this, but your supposed to tell your mortgage company.

In reality very few people actually do, and you will usually be charged for the privilege.

olly300

zag2me wrote:

Loads of people do this, but your supposed to tell your mortgage company.

In reality very few people actually do, and you will usually be charged for the privilege.

Lots of people rent out a room or rooms without telling their mortgage company but they generally live in one of the rooms and don't get their employer to house other employees with them. They ask around at work, through friends' or advertise for people who want a room to rent. It's easier for a landlord to get rid of a tenant if they also live in the property.

TEDDYRUKSPIN

Biggest misunderstanding. The lender is more worried that if you go bankrupt or can't afford the mortgage payments, they will need to take the property back. If someone is living there without consent, it will be a slower process to sell the property. At the end of the day, it is about money.

Insurance must be held and you have to pay tax if you are making profit.