Consent to let, HSBC - Airbnb a room

Martico

You might also need to let your house and contents insurer(s) know about your intentions to get a lodger

lookstraightahead

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

I thought if you had a mortgage you owned the property and could do what you like, isn`t that supposed to be the advantage over renting? Even renters sub-let rooms though?

The money the bank lends is based on having the house as security.

You don't own a house outright until you have the deeds, so it's not really yours until you pay off your mortgage (or at least you own the debt against the house).

TripleH

I'd say your insurer is going to be more concerned about you renting out a room on Airbnb than your mortgage provider.

I suspect the issue comes down to rental contracts and what rights they convey should the property need repossessing, which in theory would mean Airbnb is more attractive than a 12-month badly worded lodger agreement to a lender.

Sarah1Mitty2

lookstraightahead said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

I thought if you had a mortgage you owned the property and could do what you like, isn`t that supposed to be the advantage over renting? Even renters sub-let rooms though?

The money the bank lends is based on having the house as security.

You don't own a house outright until you have the deeds, so it's not really yours until you pay off your mortgage (or at least you own the debt against the house).

So many people will be waiting a long time before they can use their property as they might like to then?

propertyrental

user1977 said:

silvercar said:

If you are Airbnb the whole property I can understand the need for consent, bnb-ing a room shouldn’t require permission as you remain resident.

Depends on what the lender's conditions say. In the case of HSBC:

"If you are the legal owner of the property and signing the mortgage deed giving us security for the money we lend, you must:...

* not share or give up possession of the property or any part of it unless you have a buy to let mortgage or we have otherwise given our written consent"

https://www.lms.com/conveyancerzone/Pages/Download.aspx?dem_id=1401197

(whether they'd ever notice or do anything about it is of course a different question)

Renting a room is not "giving up possession of the property or any part of it." The occupant would have no legal rights (as would a leaseholder or tenant). There would only be a licence to occupy which could be withdrawn at any time.

Additional obligations state:
"You must occupy the property as your main residence and not let it without our consent".

Clearly the OP will still be occupying as his main residence, and he will not be letting it.

Sarah1Mitty2

That sounds more sensible.

Scotbot

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

I thought if you had a mortgage you owned the property and could do what you like, isn`t that supposed to be the advantage over renting? Even renters sub-let rooms though?

By definition if you have a mortgage you do not own the property.  

user1977

Scotbot said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

I thought if you had a mortgage you owned the property and could do what you like, isn`t that supposed to be the advantage over renting? Even renters sub-let rooms though?

By definition if you have a mortgage you do not own the property.  

By definition you do own the property, but the mortgagee has a charge over it.

Sarah1Mitty2

Scotbot said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

I thought if you had a mortgage you owned the property and could do what you like, isn`t that supposed to be the advantage over renting? Even renters sub-let rooms though?

By definition if you have a mortgage you do not own the property.  

Why does the media continually refer to people with mortgages as "homeowners" in that case?

MobileSaver

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

Scotbot said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

I thought if you had a mortgage you owned the property and could do what you like, isn`t that supposed to be the advantage over renting? Even renters sub-let rooms though?

By definition if you have a mortgage you do not own the property.  

Why does the media continually refer to people with mortgages as "homeowners" in that case?

Because Scotbot's definition is incorrect?

The Land Registry is the official record of who owns property in the UK and that will confirm someone is a homeowner regardless of whether they have a mortgage or not...