Negative equity problems

LatinDancer

There's nothing I can do then.

Just sell and pay ...

LatinDancer

Can't see the replies anymore. My computer went strange for a while ... It's back now ... Sorry.

DD265

Are all three in negative equity or, just one/two?

Could you 'gift' one or more of the properties to your ex? I appreciate that at some point house prices could go up and he might do well out of it, but on the other hand they could fall or you could struggle to let etc.

Could you sell your house (assuming it's not in negative equity) and buy your ex out from one of the BTL? One down, two to go.

I can't help but thinking it might be easiest to cut your losses and just walk away from at least some of it rather than risk things taking a turn for the worse.

Comms69

LatinDancer wrote: »

Jump off a bridge

Run away to South America

Live on the streets

What about renting?
Council Housing?


You need to address this head on, not get melodramatic. Sorry but forewarned is forearmed and all that

LatinDancer

All 3 negative ... I'd love to gift them all to him. Is that even possible?

LatinDancer

Thanks for all your replies have to go out now. �� I'm feeling a bit ill. Need fresh air ... I know I've been burying my head in the sand and the truth is very hard to deal with.

TrickyDicky101

LatinDancer wrote: »

All 3 negative ... I'd love to gift them all to him. Is that even possible?

Not possible - not without his and lender's consent.

EDIT: to add, if they are all in negative equity the lender is highly unlikely to give consent. At the moment they have two potential targets to get repayment from (you and ex) - if they allowed you to transfer equity solely to ex then they would only have one person to chase.

ThePants999

I don't understand the "sell the properties" answers.

The options on the table are to keep the current arrangement and RISK being financially crippled, or to sell them and DEFINITELY be financially crippled. Why the hell would you pick option 2!?

Comms69

ThePants999 wrote: »

I don't understand the "sell the properties" answers.

The options on the table are to keep the current arrangement and RISK being financially crippled, or to sell them and DEFINITELY be financially crippled. Why the hell would you pick option 2!?

Im certainly not saying sell it all now because the OP wouldn't be able to, the lenders wouldn't consent.


But if that decision is made the OP can look at disposing of the properties one at a time.

Owain_Moneysaver

Comms69 wrote: »

That is a terrible idea. These properties need to be sold!

Not necessarily. They are covering their costs at the moment. There may be opportunity to reduce costs, eg by self-managing rather than using an agent, or by spending more in the short term on upgrading fixtures to reduce repair bills. Or there may be an opportunity to increase revenue, eg by upgrading the property to attract a higher rent, or letting by the room as an HMO rather than a single house.

The concern at the moment appears to be one of potential future personal liability for business debts. Even if the business is not put into a limited company, a proper partnership agreement should be drawn up. The present informal arrangement cannot be relied upon if the other partner is financially flaky.