{"id":10618,"date":"2011-04-11T17:15:27","date_gmt":"2011-04-11T16:15:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/?p=10618"},"modified":"2020-10-20T16:36:04","modified_gmt":"2020-10-20T15:36:04","slug":"but-to-let-iva-bankruptcy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/but-to-let-iva-bankruptcy\/","title":{"rendered":"But to Let in IVA or Bankruptcy"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>All through the real-estate boom which preceded the current recession  men and women in britain started to dip their toes in the property  market in the expectation of increasing equity over a period of five to ten years in the hope and expectation that this probably would let them  have a really good yield on their funds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<p>Acquire a property at a good cost, let it out for just a few years  with the rental money taking care of the mortgage repayments and then  sell it on, pocketing the gains. As a result the boom extended to what  grew to become the called the \u2018Buy to Let\u2019 sector. The idea was simple  enough. A person or a couple with a decent disposable earnings get hold  of a house and let it out to tenants. Home mortgages of up to 100% were  easy to come by and rents were buoyant. In reality the rental income was  anticipated to more than cover the monthly mortgage repayments. The  house was expected to add to in price over time and in time the sale of  the property would undoubtedly yield a nice little return, even  considering capital gains tax. And why stop at one house? If the plan  worked with one property, why not choose two, six, twenty, a hundred or  even more houses?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"849\" height=\"566\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/Fotolia_82805090_S.jpg\" alt=\"Buy to Let\" class=\"wp-image-10643\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/Fotolia_82805090_S.jpg 849w, https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/Fotolia_82805090_S-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/Fotolia_82805090_S-768x512.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 849px) 100vw, 849px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>So, what could go wrong? Two things could and  did. The persistent rise in property prices slowed down and gradually  began to go the other way as property sales volumes and prices tumbled.  All the interest in rental properties began to reduce and rental profits  began to fall. Suddenly those people who got into the \u2018Buy to Let\u2019  sector discovered that they were not able to reverse the course of  action readily. Given that sales of real-estate dropped as a consequence  did prices. And so did rental earnings. The mortgage payments on many  properties began to go higher than the lease income and in some cases  letting houses at any sort of reasonable level of lease earnings turned  out to be extremely difficult. The spectre of negative equity had become  a reality for many in the sector. Trying to sell properties at a loss  was a extremely unappealing option. People held on to their \u2018Buy to Let\u2019  properties for too long hoping against hope that the housing market  would get better but it simply got much worse. In due course many such  people found that they were insolvent and that their disposable income  were not sufficient to close the gap between their home loan payments  and their lease income. Thus their mortgage payments began to fall into  arrears and they began to search for solutions to their financial  problems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Due to the fact selling the properties would result  in shortfalls debtors discovered that their options were limited to  petitioning for Bankruptcy (BCY) or entering into an Individual  Voluntary Arrangement (IVA). Picking the best solution to go with  depended for the most part on each individual\u2019s circumstances. The  primary factor to be looked at in an IVA is the disposition of the  creditors and in BCY the attitude of the Official Receiver and\/or of the  Trustee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Buy to Let in an IVA<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>When it comes to  proposing an IVA, a \u2018Buy to Let\u2019 property needs to be thought about from  two points of views &#8211; the net cost to the debtor of keeping the  property and the equity therein. If the debtor have several or indeed  many such properties, then each property normally has to be looked at on  its own and on its own merits, as it were. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If a property is  \u2018cost neutral\u2019 i.e. the lease earnings are completely consumed by the  mortgage payments (plus any additional valid related costs among them  insurance or servicing) with no significant surplus or deficit arising  then creditors will only be thinking about whether there may be any  equity available in and recoverable from the property. Unsecured  creditors are not going to push the debtor to dispose of a property  which is in negative equity since any deficiency arising would most  likely then be introduced into the IVA and probably have the effect of  decreasing the dividend for all creditors. If alternatively the property  has a considerable level of positive equity then creditors will expect  all such equity or a high percentage of it to be introduced into the  IVA. Thus the particular property in question may have to be put up for  sale or the equity addressed by another way such as the contribution of  third party money or remortgage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If the property is \u2018cost  positive\u2019 and provides a lot of net income i.e. the lease income exceeds  the mortgage payments (plus any other valid related expenses such as  insurance or maintenance), then creditors will expect any such surplus  income to be contributed to the IVA over the full time frame of the IVA.  If the property is in negative equity, it is not in the interests of  creditors that it be put up for sale. If there is substantial equity in  the property then creditors will rely on all or a high percentage of  such equity to be realized by sale or remortgage before the end of the  term of the IVA, normally in the fourth or fifth year. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Finally  if the property is \u2018cost negative\u2019 i.e. the rental earnings are  significantly lower than the mortgage repayments (plus any other genuine  related costs such as insurance or upkeep), then creditors might  require the debtor to sell the property. Following such a sale, the cost  savings made from getting rid of the \u2018cost negative\u2019 factor would allow  monthly contributions to the IVA to be enhanced. If the property was in  positive equity, any equity realized would be contributed to the IVA.  Obviously, if the property was in substantial negative equity, the  shortfall following its sale would be claimed as an unsecured debt of  the arrangement. This could depress the dividend to such an extent that  it would be in the interests of the unsecured creditors to allow the  debtor to keep the property, notwithstanding the fact that its retention  would be \u2018cost negative\u2019. However, once the property is no longer in  negative equity, creditors might require that it be sold and the savings  introduced into the IVA. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Buy to Let in Bankruptcy<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The bankrupt\u2019s property vests in the trustee immediately on his  appointment taking effect or in the case of the official receiver, on  his becoming trustee. The trustee can disclaim any onerous property and  any property in significant negative equity would be regarded as onerous  property.<br> <br> Property with equity of up to \u00a31,000 &#8211; looked at as  de minimis &#8211; can be bought back from the trustee for a moderate sum.  It&#8217;s not at all out of the ordinary for the family of a bankrupt to  acquire such a property on payment of \u00a31 plus the official receiver\u2019s  costs of \u00a3211. A recent change in policy by the Insolvency Service  ensures that this buy back will usually not now take place until two  years and three months have elapsed since the bankruptcy order was made.  <br> <br> If the equity in the property is in the range of \u00a31,000 to  \u00a35,000 then the trustee may try to register a charge on the property  rather than seeking to realize this equity by having the property sold,  because of the risk that the sales price might not achieve market value  and that the equity realized might not cover the cost of sales.<br> <br>  If the equity in the property exceeds \u00a35,000, the trustee may try to  sell off the property and to realize the equity for the benefit of  creditors and to pay the costs of bankruptcy. The bankruptcy laws deal  in great detail with the rights and duties of the trustee and of the  bankrupt and with the rights of other parties such as the bankrupt\u2019s  family and of creditors.<br> <br> Where a bankrupt possesses one or more  \u2018Buy to Let\u2019 properties it appears that there has been a relatively  recent change in the attitude of some trustees to the treatment of such  properties. Historically where there was little or no equity in such a  property, trustees allowed the bankrupt\u2019s family to \u2018buy back\u2019 the  property and allowed the bankrupt to manage the letting of the property  and the servicing of the mortgage. Any surplus income thus generated  would constitute part of the bankrupt\u2019s disposable income and be subject  to an income payments order. Thus the trustee would receive payments  from the bankrupt for up to three years. <br> <br> More recently, it  would appear that some trustees seek to seize control of such \u2018Buy to  Let\u2019 properties and then to assume all responsibility for them: collect  all rental income; pay the mortgage and all associated insurance &amp;  maintenance costs; deal with all rental and tenant issues and take all  the regular decisions regarding the properties. If the properties go  into significant positive equity in the first three years of the  bankruptcy, the trustee would also be able to realize the equity prior  to the property re-vesting in the bankrupt person. The reason for this  change in approach by trustees is unclear unless they expect to increase  dividends for creditors by taking such action. If you become bankrupt  and the trustee is intending to seize control of your \u2018Buy to Let\u2019  properties, you should seek to get legal advice on this issue.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>When it comes to  proposing an IVA, a \u2018Buy to Let\u2019 property needs to be thought about from  two points of views &#8211; the net cost to the debtor of keeping the  property and the equity therein.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"none","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2,7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10618","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bankruptcy-articles","category-iva-articles"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10618","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10618"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10618\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10652,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10618\/revisions\/10652"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10618"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10618"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationaldebtrelief.co.uk\/debt-articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10618"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}