Unclear whether residential or buy to let

beckysbobbles1

My boyfriend and I are considering our future house options.


We both have separate properties and have considered the idea of in the future selling my house to buy a family home. I would have the property in my name and the mortgage in my name. He would live there and contribute to the bills and possibly the mortgage.


I know they'll be some sort of party interest that he would have in the property so I'd need to figure out how that works.


We then thought we would keep his property and rent it out. I am of the impression that this would need to be on a BTL basis. He wouldn't be living in the property, nor would his family but rented out privately.


Although he will not be on my mortgage. Am I right assuming he couldn't hold that property as residential in his name because he won't be living there?


We may also consider buying a third property in joint names. I know this definitely would be BTL.


Any guidance is greatly appreciated.

foxy-stoat

He can appeal for Consent to Let from his current lender - you all criteria are met then he can let it out on this basis for a few years and maybe change to a BTL later on.

Does he want to be a Landlord, have you crunched the numbers to make sure it is worth it and it would work out?

He would have zero interest in your property if he is not on the mortgage.

beckysbobbles1

foxy-stoat wrote: »

He can appeal for Consent to Let from his current lender - you all criteria are met then he can let it out on this basis for a few years and maybe change to a BTL later on.

Does he want to be a Landlord, have you crunched the numbers to make sure it is worth it and it would work out?

He would have zero interest in your property if he is not on the mortgage.

Thanks so much for the reply. It's all early days but I completely forgot about the consent to lease arrangement - thank you. Would the property remain as residential at that point?


He does want to be a landlord. Luckily he's very hands on so has the ability to fix anything that may crop up.


I always thought there was some sort of consent you need to sign when another adult is living in the property whom isn't on the mortgage?


If we marry though, I assume that would change everything?

foxy-stoat

How do you mean the property remain residential? This wouldn't be his main residence if it was let to tenants.

Unless you intent on making your BF a paying lodger your T's & C's probably say you should inform the lender but thats up to you to have a read up - my wife is not on my mortgage (due to hideous past credit history) but she had to sign an agreement but that is more in line with if I stopped paying the mortgage for and they repossessed she would have no rights to stay - not really sure why that is as I would have no right to stay either if I didnt pay the mortgage. Maybe its the children under 16 thing.

If you married it wouldn't change, only if you divorced he could have a claim on the property.

As for being a Landlord, I used to rent out my old place but the income tax changes meant it wasn't really worth it for me once I breached the 40% tax bracket.

Soundgirlrocks

foxy-stoat wrote: »

He would have zero interest in your property if he is not on the mortgage.

That's not true, the OP said he will be contributing to the mortgage he will build a beneficial interest in the property (unless they specifically agree he isn't and even then a court at some future point could override that) You do not need to be married to build up a beneficial interest.