Jump to content

matty c

Established Member
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About matty c

  • Rank
    Established member
  1. Thanks Dino. I wasn't aware of that. I'll keep my eye on it but as you say, it'd be a gamble at the moment. Renewing the lease does seem to be a major snagging point with a lot of properties, particularly given that at some point, sooner or later, a buyer is going to have to look into it. Almost like these properties are a ticking time bomb and whoever ends up with it in their hands at the point where the lease renewal can't be ignored any longer - boom! It's seriously putting me off the purchase even though it's still 127 years. I found a couple of the podcasts where our lovely hosts discuss it and the advice given by Rob B in one of them is that as a general rule of thumb he uses 125 years as the cut off point. Anything over - OK. Anything under - doesn't advise doing the deal (or at least warns of the pitfalls). So, on that basis, my first thoughts were I'm OK - 127 years just about makes the cut. However, I then followed that logic through to the conclusion of 20/25 years down the line when the mortgage term is complete and I might want to sell. Lease term now 107/102 years and I'm trying to sell it. Would I buy it? No. Would anyone who's listened to the Podcast and taken the Robs' advice buy it? No. Would any like -minded investors buy it? No, or probably not. So, I've immediately removed a portion of the population who might want to buy it. That can't be a good thing when I want to achieve the highest sale price. Having said that, I guess there had to be a number put on it for advice purposes and if that number was 250 years, then I'd be thinking the same about a lease that was currently 252 years. But you get my point.
  2. Hi Paul It's in Liverpool. Yeah, if it was 250 years or anything above 150, I wouldn't be too concerned. However, the primary reason for buying is for capital growth and then sell on. So, I'm thinking it's not just about me buying now and the lease still being 'active' when I'm dead, but thinking about potential buyers in 20 years and if a 107 year lease would put them off then as it most definitely would put me off now.
  3. Hi there Looking at an apartment with 127 years left on the lease. It only began with 141 years from 2005. What's the general consensus - let's say I buy now and try to sell in 20 years, that's 107 years remaining. Will that be too off-putting to potential buyers and so I should swerve it now, with that knowledge? Do I have any options now to get the lease extended as part of the purchase? There are hundreds of apartments in the building - is the lease on the building as a whole or can it be individual? I know Rob B had some advice on this in one of the Podcasts but I can't quite remember the numbers he advised. Any advice much appreciated. Thanks, Matt
  4. Hello I am wondering what people's experiences are with successfully acquiring a BTL mortgage for the purpose of a short term let property? I am going to speak with a broker about it but just wanted to hear any anecdotal evidence. The property in question has a lease which specifically allows both short term and standard ASTs. I believe that it used to be nigh on impossible to get one but now is a little easier, although may come at a cost of a higher interest rate? What if you're not quite sure yet exactly which market you are going to advertise the property for? Tell them when you have chosen? Any advice and experience greatly received. Thanks
  5. Thanks guys. That's really useful. It's one of those things where I had absolutely no idea going in what brokers might charge so that has given me a good insight and some figures to judge whether a broker is either: a) way under (and therefore arouse suspicion) b) way over (and therefore unjustified) Thanks
  6. Hi This might be a bit of a generic question and I understand that all situations differ but, ball park figure, what kind of fees would you expect a mortgage broker to charge for securing a Ltd Company BTL mortgage for you (and doing everything that comes with it)? Thanks in advance.
  7. Thanks for your responses. kent614 - yes I have saved capital in the bank. But my thinking is that I could use that to buy more than one property if I borrow as well. For example, I could buy 2 properties using part cash, part mortgage on both. I am better doing that aren't I than using all of the cash and borrowing less for one property? I would still be playing it relatively safe as I would only borrow about 60% LTV on both. As an example: Property 1 - £120k. Borrow £72k. Put £48k of my own cash in. Property 2 - £120k. Borrow £72k. Put £48k of my own cash in. My question was really around whether a) I am able to borrow the money using my residential property as the guarantee b) how much advantage does this actually have in terms of getting a better mortgage product, as oppose to getting a buy to let mortgage product. I'm probably best speaking to a mortgage broker but just thought I'd ask the question here first.
  8. Hello I am a newbie looking for some advice on how I should go about achieving leverage. My situation is that I am very happy in my job and looking to invest my saved capital in property rather than keep it in the bank. The main aim is capital gains over the long term. I have no mortgage on my residential property which is worth in the region of £340k Should I/can I use my residential property to borrow the money I need to fund my property instead of looking for a buy to let mortgage on the properties I purchase? I am thinking that the main advantage would be a better mortgage product with a better rate. Or do lenders insist that you borrow the money on a buy to let basis? Any information very much appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...