Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,757
The lenders were much slower and much less generous in restructuring buy to lets than family homes, so it is no surprise that 216 BTLs wrongly lost ownership.
In fact, I would say that there were more who were never in any financial difficulty at all with their buy to let, but the very high SVRs made them unprofitable so they sold them with no intervention from the bank at all.
So the 216 figure is probably an understatement.
Brendan
In fact, I would say that there were more who were never in any financial difficulty at all with their buy to let, but the very high SVRs made them unprofitable so they sold them with no intervention from the bank at all.
So the 216 figure is probably an understatement.
Brendan
Last edited: