3 ms·

This can certainly work out but it's much riskier than a solo or married couple purchase. When it works out it's an amazing arrangement. So high risk high rewar

• notahacker 8y ago
  Is it really riskier than a married couple purchase, assuming the friends have lived together for a reasonable period before? There's 39 divorces for every 100 marriages in the UK, and needless to say it's a lot easier to draw up "what happens if you want to move or can't make mortgage payments" contracts between friends...
  • astura 8y ago
    It is, because there is an entire legal framework around marriage and asset ownership whereas there's no legal framework around BFFs. A married couple has the "benefit" of going through divorce proceedings where a judge divides up assets equitably and it's legally enforced with a divorce decree. If you're buying a house with a friend you're going to want to draft up an contract to avoid "no man's land." Then there's the "mixing business and friendship" issue. Civil marriage is already a type of business partnership, whereas friendship is not, so you're adding a new business partnership. If your buying with friends you're risking your friendship. I know someone who owns a house with her brother and it's a shit show. You're also tripling your exposure (3 people rather than 1)
  • tomatocracy 8y ago
    The tax system is kinder to married couples who split up than cohabiting people in this scenario. Stamp duty on a transfer to the remaining party can accrue the 3% "second home" charge if you're not careful whereas there's an exemption for married couples transferring properties between themselves. Married couples can also transfer assets between themselves without being liable to capital gains tax. This matters if someone moves out before a sale or buyout of their share.
• marssaxman 8y ago
  Seems much less risky than a married couple purchase - friends are far less likely than couples to experience acrimonious breakups.