Consent to let

ngill2008

Hi,I am purchasing a new property on a residential morgtgage to live in and the house we current live is being changed to a consent to let. One of the special conditions of the release of funds from the new mortgage provider is that our current mortgage is changed to a buy to let. I was wondering if a consent to let would be sufficient as to change to a buy to let would be costly. We already have letting valuation quotes and they cover the cost of the mortgage and leaveus with extra money as well. Any advice would be very welcome, thanks!

payless

proof of consent would normally be enough..but of course only the new lender can tell you for sure ... . it isn't with the same lender ( or group) though is it?

ngill2008

Hi,thanks. I just want to have an idea before I call them,so i dont get my hopes up. No they're not the same groups. Current mortgageis Northern Rock, new mortgage is Derbyshire Building society.

TEDDYRUKSPIN

Actually some lenders are different. Some require you to convert to buy to let and other's a consent to let.

Now how they work this out is simple. If they require you to convert to buy to let, the reason being is that you can not actually afford two mortgage based on your incomes. Therefore, one has to be calculated on income and the buy to let on rental income.

Consent to let is simply that you have consent to rent out your FSA residential property for a length of time (i.e. with tenancy insurance) for a short period of time. This is calculated by income.

BTL are calculated by two types. Rental with assured shorthold tenancy agreements. Usually 130% of the mortgage payments. Or income basis, hence affordability.

ANSWER:

Ask the lender why?

MarkyMarkD

It's academic whether the mortgage on the first property is CALLED a residential mortgage with consent to let, or CALLED a buy-to-let mortgage.

All that (should) matter to the second lender is that the first mortgage cost is covered by the rental income.