RENTING? Check your LL has permission to let that...

[MissMoneypenny]

If you are renting or intending to rent, check the landlord has been received Consent to Let, from their mortgage lender. Without the lenders permission to let, you could be thrown out of the property without any notice.

Visit land registry.gov.uk site and download the property details for just £3 .
Look under 'Charges' and this should show that the mortgage lender has the landlord's address listed at a different address to the property the landlord is trying to rent out. With the landlord showing as being listed at a different adddress, the mortgage lender knows the landlord doesn't live at this propery.

If they have received Consent to Let (which is permission given from the mortgage lender on a residential mortgage) ask for proof of this and check how long that consent is valid for. You can always take a copy of the Consent to Let and ask the lender to verify it. A landlord who has forged a document is going to be unwilling to give out a copy. Or you can look up who the landlord's mortgage lender is on land registry (link above) and write and ask them if the landlord has their permision to let the property. They may not be able to respond, but if the landlord hasn't got their permission, they will be able to deal with the landlord themselves. Lenders are now adding penalty interest rates if they find someone is letting a property without their consent.

Do other families a favour and report all landlords who don't have permission to let, to their lender (details of the lender can be found on the Land Registry deeds - link above) and enclose any evidence you have that they are trying to rent the property. Then report them to hmrc.gov.uk/reportingfraudYou can do this online or by a free phone call. You don't have to leave your details.

Corporations, Housing Associations and Councils ask landlords for proof that they have received Consent to Let from their mortgage lender. Private tenants should ask for this proof too.

Beware that many letting agents don't ask landlords for proof of the Consent to Let (permission given by the mortgage lender on a residential mortgage) or for proof that they have a Buy to Let mortgage, so don't think you are safe if you rent through a letting agent. Most Letting Agents do not ask for proof that the landlord is up to date on their mortgage payments on the property they want to rent out.

Note. Some landlords who don't have their mortgage lenders Consent to Let, use the Post Office redirection service. If you suspect this, address an envelope to your landlord at the address you are renting and see if the letter arrives at your home. Beware of landlords who have their post delivered to the property you are renting as their mortgage lender will know the landlords new address if they have given their Consent to Let.

"Wary tenants change terms of reference on landlords
Renters run background checks on property owners"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009...ting-mortgages

NEWS - NOVEMBER 2009
Govt Reneges on help for Tenants in LL Repossession Cases
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...html?t=2099887

[socrates]

And I thought I was the only one with nothing better to do on a Saturday night!

[MissMoneypenny]

Unfortunately, we are once again seeing threads from people who want to rent their property and are refusing to ask permission to let from their lenders.

[socrates]

Is that aimed at me because I can assure you that all my properties are correctly registered with my lenders - after all they are all on BTL mortgages.

[PayDay]

Originally Posted by socrates

Is that aimed at me because I can assure you that all my properties are correctly registered with my lenders - after all they are all on BTL mortgages.

Then why are you getting upset about people checking that a landlord has permission to rent?

As a landlord myself, I think that is an absolute must that renters check Land Registry to see if a landlord has been granted permission to rent from their lenders.

[socrates]

Upset - moi!

That was jovial banter and I think the amount of tenants that have actually checked is less than the people in this threesome!

[PayDay]

Originally Posted by socrates

I think the amount of tenants that have actually checked is less than the people in this threesome!

Daft isn't it. People will spend hundreds paying for credit checks and moving costs, but won't spend £3 on Land Registry to check the landlord has been granted permission to rent. It will cost them thousands in storage and hotel bills if they have to move out of the rental without notice.

[socrates]

To be honest though - if a mortgage is being serviced even if the lender found out I doubt people would be turfed out.

Seems a bit extreme - perhaps people can let us know what happened in their experience.

[TJ27]

So if I decide to let out the house I currently own and live in, after getting permission from my lender, does my lender change my place of residence on the land reg documents?

[socrates]

Now theres a question and a half - over you to you Moneypenny!

[silvercar]

As TJ27 points out, if the property was previously the main residence of the (now) landlord, the land registry will show the property address as the registered address of the owner. The landlord could well have consent to let from the lender, or he may not.

If the property was bought as a BTL then the registered address would be different.

There is also no way of knowing if the landlord has offered the property as security for any business loans etc. Even if the landlord has "just" given personal guarantees to banks, in the event of a business folding, the lender could pursue a charging order on the property and eventually try to take possession of it.

[hearts]

Don't waste the 3 quid money is hard enough to get without giving it away ;-)

[MissMoneypenny]

Originally Posted by silvercar

if the property was previously the main residence of the (now) landlord, the land registry will show the property address as the registered address of the owner. The landlord could well have consent to let from the lender, or he may not.

The tenant should ensure that the landlord is able to provide proof that they have been granted permission from their mortgage lender, to rent the property and check that that proof is genuine. It is too risky for the tenant if they just take the landlords word that they have received permission, as the tenant could be thrown out by the mortgage lender will little or no notice to move. If in doubt, don't rent that property.

Originally Posted by silvercar

There is also no way of knowing if the landlord has offered the property as security for any business loans etc. Even if the landlord has "just" given personal guarantees to banks, in the event of a business folding, the lender could pursue a charging order on the property and eventually try to take possession of it.

If the landlord had permission to let from their mortgage lender, then the tenant would be given at least 2 months notice to find another property. Without the landlord asking for permission to let, the tenant could be thrown out with little of no notice.

[silvercar]

The tenant should ensure that the landlord is able to provide proof that they have been granted permission from their mortgage lender, to rent the property and check that that proof is genuine. It is too risky for the tenant if they just take the landlords word that they have received permission, as the tenant could be thrown out by the mortgage lender will little or no notice to move. If in doubt, don't rent that property.

I totally agree, but there is no document that can be produced which shows that the landlord has the correct mortgage. Lenders won't discuss landlords affairs with tenants due to data protection.

If the landlord had permission to let from their mortgage lender, then the tenant would be given at least 2 months notice to find another property. Without the landlord asking for permission to let, the tenant could be thrown out with little of no notice.

Agree, in a straight forward mortgage situation. Won't apply to personal insolvency and business failings.

There really should be a certificate. Any tenant looking at a property should be shown gas certificate, EPC, building insurance and mortgage letting approval documents.

[socrates]

Expand on this please - did you use any of the funds for a new place?

When did you raise the money?

What reason did you give for needing the funds that you raised?

[socrates]

I think we need a mortgage adviser on this one - could be perceived as raising money for BTL but saying something else.

You need to tell the lender your intentions perhaps they will just be happy to have the mortgage serviced every month regardless of your intentions.

[MissMoneypenny]

Originally Posted by socrates

To be honest though - if a mortgage is being serviced even if the lender found out I doubt people would be turfed out.

Seems a bit extreme - perhaps people can let us know what happened in their experience.

There have been many threads on here where people have paid their rent, only to find out that the landlord didn't pay the mortgage. The thread that sticks in my mind the most was the one where the tenant was given half an hour to put stickers on their property before he had to leave the rental house.

If the Landlord had received permission from the lender to let the property, then the tenant would have been given at least 2 months to find another house.

[silvercar]

If the Landlord had received permission from the lender to let the property, then the tenant would have been given at least 2 months to find another house.

Only if the judge insists that the lender does this on the grounds that the lender knew there were tenants. If the judge doesn't insist and this is less likely if the tenants do not appear in court, the judge could still grant immediate possession.

[silvercar]

Originally Posted by mini_cooper

Hi, I have been a lurker to this site for many months and found an lot of great info.

I have just rented my flat, but I did not ask my lender for approval.

I have an offset mtg and raised another mortgage on another property. The property that is rented has a £95,000 mtg on it and £94,900 in the savings pot.

I really don't think I should ask permission, but your thoughts and comments would be welcome.

You took a residential mortgage and are now not living in the property. This is something that you should be telling your lender. As the monthly payments are virtually nil there is almost zero chance of you defaulting on the mortgage, so the risk to your tenants is negligible. Presumeably you have the right to withdraw money from the savings pot and so create a real mortgage monthly payment requirement.

Interesting tax situation you have created. I wonder whether the interest on the new mortgage could be considered an expense of your letting business or not. Also, depending on the treatment of your savings pot by your lender whether the interest on the offset mortgage can be claimed as a business expense.

[Biggie]

Originally Posted by mini_cooper

Hi, I have been a lurker to this site for many months and found an lot of great info.

I have just rented my flat, but I did not ask my lender for approval.

I have an offset mtg and raised another mortgage on another property. The property that is rented has a £95,000 mtg on it and £94,900 in the savings pot.

I really don't think I should ask permission, but your thoughts and comments would be welcome.

In addition to above comments :

Would you still be covered by your building insurance !!!