I have no problem signing the cottage over but the problem lies with the UK apartment. It is in thousands of euro of negative equity. If I sell it at a loss I will be left with a personal loan to pay the shortfall. I do not have the money to pay such a large debt and besides the invesment property provider does not see it feasable. They are being very rational were as my main provider is not.
Our home provider is using this excuse to cause problems with MARP. There is a large thread I started at the earlier part of the year; which you will see if you look under previous threads started by me. It's all self explanitory.
Wishes: why should people here who have are giving of their time and advice/opinions for free be asked to first search for, and then plough through some other large thread of yours.
IMO this is disingenuous, particularly when you say its all self explanatory.
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder
, likewise self explanatory lies in the eyes of the 'explainer'.
I repeat what I wrote earlier,
with one addition
It would be more useful for people offering advice here if there was some numbers provided to help with your query.
for example:
what is the value/debt on the PDH and the apt?
What is the term and int rate on the finance?
Is it the same bank for both?
What currencies are you borrowed in?
How far does the rental income on apt go to covering the full cost of ownership, not just debt : all expenses?
Your mindset seems to be based on trying to get a MARP based restructuring without inclusion of all your assets?
For what its worth the uk lender is being 'rationale' only because as long as they have u tied to an apt there is some hope, whereas if you end up with a personal loan it is both unsecured and probably has no hope of being repaid.
It is also the case that if banks actually crystalize neg. equity losses it puts pressure on the rest of the balance sheet.
Wake up and smell the roses, the uk lender has its self interest and self preservation at the center of its plans.
You say
Our home provider is using this excuse to cause problems with MARP.
What excuse and in what way?