House purchase and division with multiple parties

Can Party B resell their part of the property, which also includes House B, for 300,000 EUR? Or is this part now worth significantly less (because it is only a commercial property and not approved as a residential building?)

No, because Party B is not the owner of the property, but Party A and B are owners together (you are not sharing real ownership). Which "idiot" would buy an ideal share together with Party A and then also have to use their share commercially? There will be no buyer for that, so the value of the ideal share is rather symbolic. If Party A and B do not get along anymore, Party A can also prevent the sale of the ideal share, as Party A also has to go to the notary. Forget the ideal division! Either divide really or at least according to the WEG, so that each party has "real and individual" ownership. Valuation of the respective parts by an expert; from experience, residential property is usually more valuable than commercial property with similar area/condition/age.

Forget the ideal division! Either divide physically or at least according to WEG, so that each party has "real and own" property. Valuation of the respective parts by an appraiser; from experience, living is usually more valuable than commercial use with similar areas/condition/age.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. I'm still a bit unclear about the individual terms, I have too much on my plate right now to seriously deal with it. If real division is possible, that is of course always preferable, but that often seems not possible, especially with properties in peripheral locations. But if from experience the part with commercial use is less valuable with the same area/condition/age, then that confirms the problem.

It's a pity, there are often properties that are theoretically quite nice for two parties. Recently saw two residential houses on one plot, but due to the mixed-use area, one must be used commercially.

Apart from the fact that one unit is a commercial unit, the houses are also worth very different amounts because of the year of construction, size, condition, etc. Therefore, before the purchase, it must be determined by an appraisal how much each half of the plots are worth. Each person then pays their share of €600,000 exactly in this ratio. It will never be 50:50.

Let's assume the purely theoretical case that both houses are the same age, equally well maintained, and have the same area. Even then, the commercial property would still be worth less, right?

That would have to be determined by an expert, and the land would then have to be divided accordingly so that both have approximately the same value. The question is whether that would be more like 60/40 or more like 95/5 (i.e., commercial property + 95% of the land).

I know it’s always hard to make a general assessment, but I’m mainly interested in whether it is theoretically even possible or not.

My impression is that it is definitely complicated, especially with all the insurances, and that it can be quite difficult later to find a suitable buyer. And I assume it is also difficult to get appropriate financing from a bank with two parties if the division cannot be done cleanly and equally (in whatever percentage shares).

We are still at the very beginning of our decision-making process, and new questions arise for each property... :)

Tendentially, buying with more parties offers two decisive advantages:

1. More choice: larger properties often have more attractive plots/locations and are overall cheaper than single-family homes in similar location and condition.
2. You’re not alone out in the middle of nowhere... ;)

I know, it is always hard to make a general assessment, but for me it is mainly about whether it is theoretically even possible or not.

Theoretically yes, but practically not feasible, since parties A and B are always owners of the entire property. The financing bank already becomes a problem, as there is only one first-ranking loan - for the bank there is only ONE property. Who then gets it? Party A or B? Which bank then finances the subordinated loan for the other party - and if so, under which conditions? Just don’t think about it any further, it doesn’t make sense. Sorry.

How about this: Party A buys everything and Party B only rents. A could additionally take a loan from Party B and B voluntarily agrees to a second rank. Rent and repayment could be offset.

Party A buys everything and Party B only rents. A could also take a loan from Party B and B voluntarily agrees to second rank. Rent and repayment could be offset.

... and Party A lets Party B finance part of the entire property. Good idea for Party A. Bad for Party B, because upon moving out, they retain as much as any other tenant – namely nothing (Party A must of course take care of the maintenance of the house).