repossession

lincroft1710

Could Santander repossess as they are a minority shareholder in the property?

davidmcn

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Could Santander repossess as they are a minority shareholder in the property?

They're not a "shareholder" in the property, the OP owns the entire property and Santander have a charge over the entire property. The amount of the outstanding loan relative to the value of the property doesn't affect their rights - though in practice it is likely to mean e.g. that it's more reasonable to allow the borrower a chance to sell the property themselves as they can easily clear the outstanding balance.

dc197

LittleMax wrote: »

You seem to forget that this would impact on any other income OP is currently receiving in benefits. You can't simply ignore any other income, it's not like overtime.

I cannot possibly know the OP's incomes. This was just an illustration and for that sole purpose I made an assumption/simplification.
I think that this is reasonable.

lincroft1710

I used "shareholder" to mean they had a financial interest in the property but very much a minority interest.

It is interesting that OP has not reposted in over 24 hrs. I do feel we need more info as it seems OP has already missed payments if he owes £11K

NicNicP

We recently applied for a new mortgage and discussed overpaying as this is what we currently do and have managed to reduce our mortgage. We were told that overpaying will allow you to underpay if you ever need to, as long as the amounts equal out.

AdrianC

lincroft1710 wrote: »

I used "shareholder" to mean they had a financial interest in the property but very much a minority interest.

The word you were after is "stakeholder". They have a stake in it, but they do not own a share of it.

OP - ignore MarkTheShark. A lender does not just repossess. They have to go to court to gain possession. You say the market value is £170k, and you owe £11k? Less than 6.5% loan-to-value. It is massively unlikely that a request for repossession for such a small debt would be well received.

However, it might be VERY unlikely they will repossess, but that risk is increased if you don't TALK TO THEM. Full honesty, at the earliest opportunity, is your best chance of helping yourself.

Even if it was repossessed, it would not be sold at a closed auction, it would be sold on the open market. Repossessions are sold in order to get the best outcome for the borrower - you. Buyers are disadvantaged, because the vendor - your mortgage company - can and will allow gazumping right to the very point of exchange of contracts if it will get a better return. Quite often, people can be blinded to value by the thought that it must be a bargain because it's a repo - and that allows for a fight to develop, especially once one buyer sniffs the risk of losing the costs they've incurred to date.

The equity in the property is still yours after repossession. Even if the lender does eventually repossess, and the property sells for £170k, you will receive the balance of the £159k, after any costs are deducted. If it sells for £150k, obviously it would be £139k less costs. If two people were convinced there was a bargain to be had (simply because it's a repo, bless 'em) and it sells for £190k, it would be £179k less costs.