Is he a landlord?

KiKi

jelliot wrote: »

Slightly less time than a 25 year mortgage.

But it's highly likely that the house will no longer be worth £170,000 in 23 years time. Let's say it's now worth £250k. Your OH has had £85k AND paid bills he doesn't owe, and your SIL has an asset worth £250k. Is he happy with that?

Ms-Bristol

Yes this new plan of paying a tiny rent over decades to buy a house is both unwise and unfair.

The brother waits 23 years for his inheritance locked at 2016 prices, whilst earning no interest or benefitting from an appreciating asset. Meanwhile the sister pays a peppercorn rent, enjoys the benefit of living in the property and ends up with a house worth whatever it is by 2039.

Best advice on here is to sell the house and split 50/50 which allows both parties immediate access to the funds and more importantly, preserves the relationship between the brother and sister.

Ms-Bristol

theartfullodger wrote: »

It's not your decision: it's for the Sheriff to decide (when taken to court)

Quite understand your wanting to argue he's not a landlord but IMHO he is and, if found so the consequences (eg up to £50k fine etc etc.) will be substantial.

Might be worth engaging one of the specialist landlord solicitor firms for their opinion...

I am not a legal expert but I'd imagine that such a person may consider that the sister is renting the half of the house she doesn't own from the brother. Therefore he could be considered a landlord.

One may also argue that after paying £300 a month rent for 23 years, the sister doesn't own any more of the house than on day one. Both parties potentially at risk from such an arrangement if a proper agreement is not written up by a solicitor.

silvercar

To be a landlord, you have to have a tenant (or possibly a lodger). I don't see how a part owner can be considered a tenant. That would imply that all divorcing couples, where one party moves out of the jointly owned home, become landlord & tenant of what was the marital home!

Kynthia

An owner living in the property can't be a tenant. They can't be evicted or be held to tenancy laws or need protections from a landlord with more power then them. An owner can't get environmental health involved to force their 'landlord' to complete repairs, etc. So the non-resident owner can't be a landlord.

It sounds like the sister won't even be paying rent but will be in effect paying towards the purchase of the property. Like a private mortgage, although it would be more clear cut and like a mortgage if the whole property was put in the sister's name and the brother registered the debt as a charge.