Buying a property that is currently tenanted

[Deleted User]

G_M wrote: »

If you are paying cash, you can do whatever you like, since the risks are entirely yours.

If you are getting a mortgage, discuss this with the lender's solicitor and see what they say.

Are you doing your own conveyancing? If not, your solicior shoul be explaining all this to you.

If you are, I wonder if you should be...

I have a solicitor, was just looking for some additional advice whilst waiting for them to come back to me on one of their busiest weeks of the year.

alexanderalexander

Everyone is always extremely risk averse on MSE forums -- if people sincerely followed every piece of advice given in answer to questions such as this I don't think anyone would ever buy a property! Starting conveyancing on a tenanted property (with the tenants concurrently being given their notice) is entirely normal; all I'd say is I wouldn't exchange contracts until the property was definitely empty and tenancy over.

However, on this point the OP's two posts seem to contradict each other. In the first, you say that exchange would be "subject to vacant possession", which I took to mean the property would be vacant on exchange; in the second, you say that you'll exchange prior to the tenant vacating (so presumably you meant in the first post there'll be a clause in the contract saying you aren't obliged to go on to complete if the tenant fails to vacate). That's not necessarily a problem, however, but it's not clear why you are so desperate to exchange -- I'd save the trouble of adding another clause to the contract and just exchange once the tenant is out.

[Deleted User]

Thanks alexanderalexander, I appreciate it.

By 'subject to vacant possession' I mean we'd exchange contracts, and the contract would state that it would need to be vacant in order for us to complete- we would also be putting something in the contract that would cover us for costs lost were they not gone by the date specified and we were therefore unable to complete.

We are only keen to exchange so that the vendor doesn't attempt to ask for more money should this drag on- we can't afford to pay anymore and we don't want to lose the property either. We have lost 4 properties in the past 8 months so we are keen to get something locked in.

alexanderalexander

G_M wrote: »

A mortgage lender will not permit you to exchange before the tenants have left - for obvious reasons (see the other thread I linked you to!). If you are getting a mortgage, discuss this with your lender's solicitor.

The mortgage lender certainly won't let you complete before the tenants have left, but I see no reason why a lender would object to exchange with a proviso in the contract saying the completion is conditional on vacant possession.

In terms of what to look at to prove that the tenancy is over, practically-speaking probably the most useful single thing to do is a visual inspection of the property immediately prior to completion to check if the tenant has actually physically moved out. Moving out does not necessarily have any immediate legal effect in ending the tenancy so of course check that the s.21 notice has been correctly issued etc., but in the real world if the tenant has removed all of her possessions from the property it is extremely unlikely that she'll suddenly reappear.

G_M wrote: »

Are you doing your own conveyancing? If not, your solicior shoul be explaining all this to you.

If you are, I wonder if you should be...

Solicitors will be able to explain what the lender's requirements are, but are often slow to respond and sometime don't give the most helpful answers. And I think your latter comment seemed a little rude to the OP (of course no one, not even an experienced conveyancing solicitor, should actually be doing their own conveyancing due to a lack of recourse to professional negligence insurance, but I feel your comment had a slightly unpleasant undertone to it).

G_M

alexanderalexander wrote: »

.... And I think your latter comment seemed a little rude to the OP (of course no one, not even an experienced conveyancing solicitor, should actually be doing their own conveyancing due to a lack of recourse to professional negligence insurance, but I feel your comment had a slightly unpleasant undertone to it).

Not at all.

This is a moneysaving forum, and as such I fully support people who decide to take on their own conveyancing, as I have myself several times, subject to certain criteria.

Clearly it would not be 'moneysaving' if the conveyancing went titsup, so it is only advisable, in my opinion, when

a) the individual is suitably capable and
b) the sale/purchase is suitably straight-forward

When the topic of DIY conveyancing comes up here, as it periodically does, there are always advocates and critics. There is no right answer and just as some people can DIY their own car maintenance and others need a professional, it is ultimately down to the individual.

It was in that context that I advised "If you are, I wonder if you should be...".

I'd say the same to someone changing the brakes on their car if they appeared not to fully understand how brakes work.