Tenants in Situ

LittleMax

There are 2 properties being marketed in my sister's current search area with tenants in situ. She wants to buy to live in, but is currently in rented so could consider getting a buy to let mortgage, and sit it out until she can get rid of tenants.

We are struggling with inept estate agent who has told us that property 1 has an 'insured tenancy for 1 year'. I have gone back asking if they mean assured and asked them to be very specific about whether it is an assured or assured shorthold tenancy. They say that deposit is held in custodial scheme, haven't answered whether prescribed information was given to the tenant (but I can check that out further down the line). They say no rent arrears, no repairs outstanding.

What else should I be asking?

Property 2 - tenants have no tenancy agreement. I presume sis just runs a mile from this one unless vendor is willing to sell with vacant possession?

Thanks in advance

thesaint

Forget about a BTL mortgage.
You need to make it clear that the property is being purchased with vacant possession.

If she buys with the tenants in situ, she is asking for trouble.

LittleMax

Property 1 - not willing to sell with vacant possession, she has asked.

mrginge

Is she actually in a position to get a BTL mortgage?

thesaint

Forget about Property 1, there is obviously a problem.

With Property 2, getting them out sounds like it could be a problem, and time consuming. The original landlord has the best chance of doing so.

LittleMax

mrginge wrote: »

Is she actually in a position to get a BTL mortgage?

Yes, or family could.

fairy_lights

LittleMax wrote: »

Yes, or family could.

And are they prepared to take on the responsibility of being a landlord for as long as the tenant stays?
It could take a long time to get them out if they don't want to leave.

LittleMax

fairy_lights wrote: »

And are they prepared to take on the responsibility of being a landlord for as long as the tenant stays?
It could take a long time to get them out if they don't want to leave.

Yes - I have experience as a landlord.

thesaint

I already said to forget about a BTL. As others are encouraging the possibility, I will give my reasons why it is a bad idea.

1. A BTL mortgage costs more.
2. An owner can't live in their own BTL property, so once they have paid to get the tenant out(if they indeed can be evicted), they either have to lie and pay a higher mortgage rate, or tell the truth, and pay all the costs to get out of the BTL mortgage, and get a residential one.

Forget about a BTL mortgage.

LittleMax

Thank you I hear what you are saying. Her ideal would be to negotiate for vacant possession, and she is prepared to wait for this, but houses don't come up here very often so we are exploring all options.

AJ1982

Maybe ask if the EA has any properties which are actually for sale by the people living in them, as opposed to a LL model. I would personally drop any property until it was vacated and wouldnt waste any time on searches etc