Leek United Building Society Buy to Let with no upper age limit

Leek United Building Society Buy to Let with no upper age limit

9:44 AM, 30th January 2014, About 10 years ago 14

Text Size

18 Months ago I wrote one of our most popular articles titled Ageism in BuyToLet mortgages? Myths dispelled

This article highlighted the ability to apply for Buy to Let mortgages beyond age 70 and which lenders you could consider. To this day I still regularly get calls from people who have just read the article and need help remortgaging into their retirement.

Now the Leek United Building Society is the latest lender offering a Buy to Let mortgage with no upper age limit (see product details below)

The risks to a lender in terms of Buy to Let funding is very different to them providing personal mortgages. Usually a person’s income falls when they decide to retire so it makes a lot of sense for lenders to insist on a personal mortgage being paid well before retirement. A Buy to Let mortgage is different though.  Rental income is not affected by the retirement of a borrower. These mortgages are based on far more simple commercial rules, i.e. the rental income pays the mortgage interest and the costs of property ownership and it’s far easier for a lender to take possession of a property and sell it to recover the loan in the event of mortgage payments not being made. Why therefore should ageism be an issue for Buy to Let?

Leek United Product details:

  • 3.99% 2 year discounted variable (SVR currently 5.19% minus 1.2%)
  • Maximum 75% LTV
  • Fees £199 payable up front
  • 3% early repayment charge for the first 2 years
  • No Flats, Maisonettes, HMOs, Student lets or DSS lets
  • Stress tested at 125% interest cover on the pay rate – allows you to borrow up to  240.60 times the monthly rental income (subject to 75% LTV maximum)
  • Min Loan size £75,000, Maximum loan size £500,000
  • Minimum applicant income required £20,000 but this can be pension income
  • Maximum portfolio 20 properties
  • Only available in England and Wales

If you need any help there are two ways to reach me; telephone Neil Patterson on 01603 489118 or email npatterson@property118.com

Or if you would like to add your own requirements and search for the most popular available Buy to Let products please click here ageism


Share This Article


Comments

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

17:32 PM, 30th January 2014, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Ian Ringrose" at "30/01/2014 - 17:08":

OK, the examples you have given may not be taxable but the income should be provable and on that basis I am sure there would be a lender out there who would take a commercial view if the case was presented by one of their trusted brokers.
.

Some One

20:14 PM, 30th January 2014, About 10 years ago

The age limits have always been a bit silly on BTL, the only argument I can see for it is perhaps insisting on higher rental coverage on the assumption that eventually people will reach a stage where they are more likely to need to employ an agent to manage rather than self-manage, and obviously that will come at a cost.
(Although, to contradict myself, normal rental coverage allegedly already covers that, but I wouldn't be comfortable with 125% coverage if I needed to employ an agent - that wouldn't leave me with enough safety margin)

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

20:37 PM, 30th January 2014, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Some One" at "30/01/2014 - 20:14":

I agree, I once heard that average costs of ownership, excluding mortgage interest, are typically 40% of rental value according to HMRC.

125% interest cover is far too tight unless a borrower can afford to subsidise negative cashflow as it represents an allowance of only 20% of rent to cover voids, insurance, maintenance, ground rents, service charges, letting and management let alone leaving any breathing room for interest rate rises. Also, the general idea is to make a profit isn't it?
.
.

Colin Childs

21:20 PM, 30th January 2014, About 10 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Some One" at "30/01/2014 - 20:14":

I concur with Mark's comments on the topic. There has to be a base level of guaranteed secure income in retirement. If for no other reason than to cover any potential losses. Very easy to view the situation optimistically through RTG's. Without taking any consideration of the downside risks. Incoming responsible lending policies will change the landscape in the future. The lunatics no longer run the banks. Old fashioned values are coming back into vogue.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now