Previous owner no mortgage options

mkoder

Hi,

I used to own a flat with a friend, which we lost money on and sold.

I'm now coming back to looking into potential mortgages / first time buyer schemes, but i'm struggling to work out what schemes will actually class me as a first time buyer if in fact I was a previous owner.

I actually lost money on property during the last recession and yet feel when I look at some schemes that i'm being punished for having previously owned as i'm not classed as a first time buyer.

Can anyone give me any tips on good savings schemes for mortgages that are applicable to people who've owned before but no longer have a property please?

Thanks

csgohan4

Each scheme and locality will have their own set of criteria.

In terms of your previous failed business venture, that is of no concern to the scheme provider.

You could have made millions and sold off your stock. They treat you the same, clear Terms and conditions.

Some may class you as FTB some may not irrespective of history

Lilla_D

Most lenders will define a FTB as someone who has never owned a property before. Some lenders say that if you haven't had a property for the last x years, then you could be eligible for FTB deals.

Not sure why you think you're being punished. You're technically not a FTB (save for those lenders mentioned above) regardless how the first venture turned out.

Since you don't have a property now, you could be eligible for Help to Buy, shared ownership, etc., so again, not sure why you think you have no mortgage options. Besides, many lenders don't differentiate in their rates for FTBs and home movers and there is no difference in the stamp duty any more, so chill, you'll be fine After all, it was your choice to buy a property years ago and give up your FTB status as far as most lenders are concerned.

mkoder

Well, I feel its a "punishment" (maybe bad wording), in that deals which are made available to help some people get on the ladder are not available to me, even though we might be in the exact same position, and in fact i might have been made worse off by the property ladder not better.

If FTB deals are to help people get a leg up who have no collateral, I wonder why some lender made the specific rule around having ever owned previously.

it wasn't a failed business venture btw, it was just my home. Now I'm renting, and don't own my own home

csgohan4

mkoder wrote: »

Well, I feel its a "punishment" (maybe bad wording), in that deals which are made available to help some people get on the ladder are not available to me, even though we might be in the exact same position, and in fact i might have been made worse off by the property ladder not better.

If FTB deals are to help people get a leg up who have no collateral, I wonder why some lender made the specific rule around having ever owned previously.

it wasn't a failed business venture btw, it was just my home. Now I'm renting, and don't own my own home

The fact you made a bad investment is of no concern to the provider. In fact most FTB were never in a position to buy a house as an investment, which you were.


Rules are rules and the fact some rule you out because you owned a house in the past is clear.


I doubt you would be complaining if you made large profit on the house you had. Stop complaining and start saving

mkoder

Wow, I'm amazed at the response I've had here.

"most FTB were never in a position to buy a house as an investment"

I just said I did not buy the house as an investment, i bought it as my first home! It had to be sold as my friend who lived with me moved out to get married and i couldn't afford it on my own

Yes, it's bad luck, I get that. "I doubt you would be complaining if you made large profit on the house you had" Correct, because i'd have a deposit or savings

Now, i'm looking to save again, and am trying to work out the options, even taking this for example the lifetime isa, same problem it seems

It seems i cant do because i previously owned, but I'm worse off that many FTB who never owned before, as I lost money during the recession. Yet, I can't now have any assistance to get back on my feet.

"Rules are rules' - Try to empathise, please, I understand that rules are rules, what I'm trying to understand is WHY the rules are they, WHY they are preventing me from start again. Of course I realise there are rules, but what I've found myself is in a position where I am worse off than many of the people that are able to get assistance via these schemes and yet I am not

csgohan4

mkoder wrote: »

Wow, I'm amazed at the response I've had here.

"most FTB were never in a position to buy a house as an investment"

I just said I did not buy the house as an investment, i bought it as my first home! It had to be sold as my friend who lived with me moved out to get married and i couldn't afford it on my own

Yes, it's bad luck, I get that. "I doubt you would be complaining if you made large profit on the house you had" Correct, because i'd have a deposit or savings

Now, i'm looking to save again, and am trying to work out the options, even taking this for example the lifetime isa, same problem it seems

It seems i cant do because i previously owned, but I'm worse off that many FTB who never owned before, as I lost money during the recession. Yet, I can't now have any assistance to get back on my feet.

"Rules are rules' - Try to empathise, please, I understand that rules are rules, what I'm trying to understand is WHY the rules are they, WHY they are preventing me from start again. Of course I realise there are rules, but what I've found myself is in a position where I am worse off than many of the people that are able to get assistance via these schemes and yet I am not

I am sorry if my post seemed harsh, but I don't do rose tinted posts. The rules are there to be applied to everyone and not just you, don't take it personally.

You have done well to be in a position again despite financial hardship, make the most of what you can do. You don't have to use FTB schemes and imho they are scams to make the government money especially with the HTB scheme where you could pay back more than you borrowed for example and that is before you include interest on paying it back.

tori.k

Then your circumstances wouldn't have been any different if you could not afford to run a house by yourself then, the fact you paid a smaller 5% deposit or part owned part rent would have made no difference at the time, as back then you just couldn't afford to live alone.
What's done is done. Get yourself over to the debt free wannabe forum, and post up a SOA. It doesn't matter if you have no debt they will help you see where you can trim your outgoings, giving you the chance to max your savings.
Trust me 2 years ago we wound up our business and started life minus 16K we are both in full time minimum wage jobs with cutting everything to the bare bones we managed to pay off our debts and saving a reasonable deposit, it been a bore at times, well most the time, but we are focused on the bigger picture. Think ahead be mindful of what's past but don't let it colour your future.