House rented & Mortgage Interest Supplement

galw1

Registered User
Messages
24
A friend of mine has just recieved notice that their job is to finish up. They own a property that is rented (€600 pm) but the rent nowhere near covers the mortgage (€950 pm) nor ever has done. They moved back home. Will they be entitled to Mortgage Interest Supplement for the difference? Or would they genuinely be better off taking back over the house?
 
Mortgage Interest Supplement is only paid towards your primary residence, not a rental property.

If the tenant has a fixed term lease, then they can't just take back the house.
 
It’s also worthwhile remembering that the Mortgage Interest Supplement payment is based solely on the interest portion of the loan repayment, not on the full combined interest plus capital figure.

So, even if your friend was living in the property & approved for MIS & had no other assessable means, they would get nowhere near €950, so they would still have to come up with the full capital portion of the repayment plus the shortfall in the interest portion (which would be at the very least €96 per month).

Say for example the interest portion of their repayment was €400 & the capital portion was €550, their MIS would be based on €400, so they would still have to come up with the €550 plus whatever was deducted from the €400. Those figure are just an example.

Have a look at this post: http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=877218&postcount=1

Seeing as it is a rental property, your friend could consider talking to their bank or building society & asking to go onto an ‘interest only’ repayment option for a given amount of time subject to review. If the lender agreed to this hopefully the rent would cover the interest, & would give your friend a bit of breathing space until their situation improved.
 
Mortgage Interest Supplement is only paid towards your primary residence, not a rental property.

If the tenant has a fixed term lease, then they can't just take back the house.


just to clarify this, if there is a fixed term lease this can be terminated if the owner of the property requires it for personal use/relative's use/ puts up for sale. The standard notice period has to be given.
 
just to clarify this, if there is a fixed term lease this can be terminated if the owner of the property requires it for personal use/relative's use/ puts up for sale. The standard notice period has to be given.
That is incorrect.
What you are talking about is the provision for termination of a part 4 tenancy under section 34. However a fixed term lease supercedes that if it increases a tenant's security of tenure.
this is the relevant quote from this doc [broken link removed]

A landlord can only terminate a fixed term tenancy where there the tenant has been in breach of his or her obligations. Accordingly, a landlord cannot rely on the provisions of Section 34, to terminate a fixed term tenancy during the fixed term.
So unless there is a specific break clause in the lease, then you cannot evict the tenant to take posession of the house.
 
Back
Top