Confusing mortgage advice

oakworth

Hi folks,

I'm looking to buy a house and am having some trouble with advice on how to proceed. The situation:

Divorced, no house (but previous home owner);
I live with my common law partner in her home and pay rent;
I'm looking to buy a house in Manchester, so I have my own property;
I do not intend to rent it out;
HOWEVER:
I do intend to let my mother live there rent free.
My mother has her own house but can no longer cope with stairs etc. I anticipate it taking some time to sell hers so I'd like to spare her the hassle (she's 81) of going through the sale process and move her now and sell hers in slow time.

Once sold, she will retain all proceeds from the sale (so this isn't an attempt to avoid care home costs).

All attempts at mortgage have come back with the reply that this requires a Regulated Buy to Let mortgage.

Why can't I just take a traditional residential mortgage, nominate it as my main residence (I'm most weekends anyway)?

This is frustrating, there is no financial gain here for me (quite the opposite), am just trying to do the right thing for my Mother whilst also getting back on the housing ladder.

Any advice greatly appreciated.

anselld

oakworth wrote: »

Why can't I just take a traditional residential mortgage, nominate it as my main residence (I'm most weekends anyway)?

You can only nominate a residence if you are actually resident.
You would need to pay bills there, council tax, etc and be on electoral role plus reside for sufficient time to be credible that it is actually your main residence.

The fact that you work / live away from home mid-week is not a problem in itself, plenty of people do that.

I suspect you have been honest with the mortgage Co and told them it will *not* be your main residence so you will get the correct answer based on the facts you have told.

mrginge

Not sure what advice you're looking for. It's a regulated BTL.

You can of course apply for a residential mortgage and lie to the mortgage lender in an attempt to get it approved. That would be classed as mortgage fraud and Isn't really recommended.

Your motivations (however well meaning) are not relevant I'm afraid.

betmunch

Alternatively use a lender that will allow what you want.


Have you been trying to sort this out yourself thinking it was straight forward?


Its not, get a broker on the case and everything should fall into place.

betmunch

Just to be clear, it doesn't HAVE to be a regulated BTL mortgage, but that would be the most likely solution.


Is there any reason why you are fighting against it being a regulated BTL?

oakworth

The only reason I've pushed back on Regulated BTL is to try and give me more choice in the market, what I have been offered to date isn't cheap. I have a broker coming round this afternoon, hence the request for advice.

Thank you all. Much appreciated.

infogd

I'm confused.

kingstreet

It's just a second property purchase for a family member to live in. I don't understand why it's been unnecessarily complicated, TBH.

Parents do it for their student kids all the time...

oakworth

Except it's not a second property, it's my only property. By making it a Buy To Let makes a big difference on the size of deposit I need and how competitive the product is that I'm offered. .

LateStarter

Unfortunaltey mortgage lenders have their own rules, and may not agree with you.

It really does depend on how honest you want to be - I'm not advocating fraud but they're not going to send someone out to check who's living there.

betmunch

oakworth wrote: »

Except it's not a second property, it's my only property. By making it a Buy To Let makes a big difference on the size of deposit I need and how competitive the product is that I'm offered. .

So the deposit is the problem with the regulated BTL, fair enough.


If you have a broker coming round tonight I would expect you to be all sorted by Monday, maybe sooner.