Posted on 10 March 2011 by Damien Ives
I own a house with my sister and have done for the last 3 and a half years. We both have long term partners and would now like our own space. Unfortunately we can't sell as the house is in negative equity.
My sister has found somewhere she would like to buy, however, she obviously can't have 2 residential mortgages at once.
I was planning on staying in the house, rather than renting it out, as I can afford the repayments and guarantee an income and it avoids having tenants who may well prove to be a liability.
My sister has been told she will need "consent to let" from our mortgage provider - who have agreed to provide this.
However, I am unclear whether consent to let means that we are obliged to rent it out, or whether I can carry on living there?
If necessary my partner can sign a tenancy agreement and pay the rent and I will live there with her.
Your sister will have been told she needs to obtain a consent to let by her new lender so that they can ignore the mortgage debt in the background and base their underwriting solely on the new property and mortgage debt. In this way they can show that as a Lender they have acted properly and not lent more than you sister can afford.
Just because your current lender gives their consent to let, it doesn't mean that you have to let the property out.
Answers provided in response to Ask the experts are based on the information provided and do not constitute advice under the Financial Services & Markets Act. They reflect the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions of John Charcol. All comments are made in good faith, and John Charcol will not accept liability for them.
We recommend you seek professional advice with regard to any of these topics where appropriate.