x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Written by rosalind renshaw

A new concept is due to be launched this autumn into the UK housing market, enabling first-time buyers in London to invest in their home but without a mortgage.

The scheme, from UK property and finance company Mill Group, is currently being marketed to investors, with the aim of raising a £100m property investment fund.

The ambition is to offer investors the opportunity to invest in residential owner-occupied property which will provide a new source of liquidity for first-time buyers and remove their need for a mortgage.

Under the scheme, a home buyer and an institutional investor would co-buy a property. The consumer would purchase a minimum 5% share with the investor buying the other 95%.

Together they would own the property as tenants in common, but the consumer would have full and exclusive occupancy rights, and full entitlement to the property.

The consumer would pay no stamp duty – the investor would pay this as the consumer share would almost certainly be too small to attract the tax.

The consumer would be able to buy more of the property if and when they choose, and can raise a mortgage to buy out the investor at any time after two years, at the open market value of the property at the time.

The drawback to the consumer is that they will barely profit from any uplift in the value of the property; however, they would not risk negative equity. They also have security of tenure, which they would not have as tenants.

Mill Group believes investors will be interested in the proposition because, unlike buy-to-let, properties which the occupants regard as their own homes are unlikely to suffer the usual wear and tear.   

David Toplas, CEO of Mill Group, said: “The most significant obstacle preventing more meaningful investment by UK institutions into residential property over the past decade has been a perception of intensive asset management and low income yields. 

“Quite simply, a tenant does not have enough financial or emotional investment in the property to maintain it to a reasonable standard, and this ultimately costs landlords so much money that the investment potential is undermined.

“Home buyers will be asked to purchase a minimum of 5% of the property – a deposit amount that is not currently accepted by most mortgage providers as a deposit, and so begin their purchase of a property without a mortgage lender.”

Comments

  • icon

    Yes - this all rings a bell. Does this mean they are 'still' raising funds or that this site has only just picked up on the MS story from January. Pretty sure I saw the story before even then.....

    • 06 May 2011 13:10 PM
  • icon

    Laughable as this 'innovative housing solution' is, it's old news:

    http://www.mortgagestrategy.co.uk/economy/property-fund-offers-95-deal-to-ftbs/1025392.article

    • 06 May 2011 10:41 AM
  • icon

    As I see it, the consumer, as they are now called, pays a 5% deposit and will then have to pay a sum equal to or greater than a commercial rate of interest. This will be called either interest or rent. It will probably be interest only. They may also be able to pay off the 95% balance by instalments or periodical lump sums. The $64,000 question is, will the 95% be fixed or will it increase with the value of the property. If that were the case would it also decrease if the value of the property falls as predicted for the next five years? These questions are conveniently glossed over in the article.
    Nick.

    • 06 May 2011 10:01 AM
  • icon

    Did I miss something? No mention of a payment from the junior investor to the senior investor by way of 'rent'?

    Is the senior investor going to buy 95% of a property and just wait and hope for capital uplift? Weird!

    From the article ...
    "Quite simply, a tenant does not have enough financial or emotional investment in the property to maintain it to a reasonable standard, and this ultimately costs landlords so much money that the investment potential is undermined."
    For generations people with security of tenure have treated their rented homes as their own - as they knew that as long as they paid the rent they could not be thrown out. The wonder Assured Shorthold Tenancy legislation ended all that - who is going to give a fig about a property when you can be kicked out at any time with 2 months notice?

    • 06 May 2011 08:29 AM
MovePal MovePal MovePal