Why can VAT funding avoid a personal guarantee when bridging usually cannot?

Because the repayment source is different. A standard bridge is repaid from a sale or refinance, which carries market risk. A VAT facility is repaid from an HMRC refund, which is far more predictable.

What does the lender rely on instead?

Typically the strength of the reclaim, solicitor undertakings about where the refund is paid, and control over the receiving account. Some facilities also take a debenture or a second charge.

When would a guarantee still be required?

Where recovery is uncertain — restricted or exempt use, an entity not yet registered, or an unresolved TOGC. Also where the structure is unusual or the reclaim belongs to a different entity.

Is a facility without a personal guarantee more expensive?

Often slightly, because the lender has less recourse. The premium is usually modest relative to the short term, and should be compared in pounds rather than as an annualised rate.

VAT bridging finance

VAT Funding Without Personal Guarantees

PropertyVAT Team · Updated 21 October 2026 · 3 min read

Personal guarantees are close to standard in bridging. On VAT facilities they are frequently unnecessary, and the reason is structural rather than a matter of lender generosity.

Why the exit changes the answer

A standard bridge is repaid from a property sale or a refinance. Both depend on market conditions, valuation, and a third party doing something — a buyer paying, or a lender advancing. That uncertainty is what a personal guarantee is pricing.

A VAT facility is repaid from an HMRC refund. The amount is known, the payer is the government, and entitlement is established by documents that exist before the loan is drawn.

That is a materially more predictable exit, and it means the lender's security can sit on the reclaim rather than on the borrower personally.

What lenders take instead

Not nothing. "No personal guarantee" does not mean no protection:

Protection	What it does
Solicitor undertakings	Commit the refund route and the drawdown mechanics
Control of the receiving account	The refund lands where the lender can see it
Assignment of the reclaim	Where the structure allows
Debenture over the SPV	Security at entity level rather than personal
Second charge over the property	Where taken; needs senior consent
Evidence pack conditions	Registration, option to tax, intended use

The common thread is that these attach to the transaction and the entity, not to the director's house.

When a guarantee is still asked for

The pattern is consistent: a guarantee appears where the reclaim is less certain.

Recovery is restricted. Exempt or partly exempt use means the refund may be smaller than the facility.
The entity is not yet registered. Without registration there may be no reclaim, so the exit is not established.
A TOGC is unresolved. The VAT may not arise, or may arise suddenly, and the facility is a contingency.
The reclaim belongs to a different entity. Group structures where the completing party and the registered party differ.
The structure is unusual. Nominee arrangements, joint ventures, or offshore elements.

If you are being asked for a guarantee on what looks like a straightforward case, it is worth asking which of these the lender is concerned about. Often it is something evidential that can be resolved.

How to strengthen your position

The things that remove the need for a guarantee are the same things that get you better pricing:

Register the buying entity for VAT early, and have the certificate.
Evidence the VAT position from the contract, not from an assertion.
Confirm intended taxable use in writing, so recoverability is clear.
Resolve the TOGC question before applying, or disclose it clearly as a contingency.
Match the entities — the party completing should be the party registered.
Provide filing history where the entity has one.

A case with all six is a case where the lender can see the refund coming. That is what makes recourse to you unnecessary.

What to ask a lender

Is a personal guarantee required on this case, and why?
What would remove the requirement?
What security is taken instead?
Is there a pricing difference between the two structures?
Where does the HMRC refund have to be paid?

That last question matters practically. Facilities commonly require the refund to go to a specified account, and your accountant needs to know that before filing the return — not after HMRC has paid it somewhere else.

This guide is general information, not financial advice. Security requirements vary by lender and case — confirm terms for your transaction.

Frequently asked questions

Why can VAT funding avoid a personal guarantee when bridging usually cannot?: Because the repayment source is different. A standard bridge is repaid from a sale or refinance, which carries market risk. A VAT facility is repaid from an HMRC refund, which is far more predictable.
What does the lender rely on instead?: Typically the strength of the reclaim, solicitor undertakings about where the refund is paid, and control over the receiving account. Some facilities also take a debenture or a second charge.
When would a guarantee still be required?: Where recovery is uncertain — restricted or exempt use, an entity not yet registered, or an unresolved TOGC. Also where the structure is unusual or the reclaim belongs to a different entity.
Is a facility without a personal guarantee more expensive?: Often slightly, because the lender has less recourse. The premium is usually modest relative to the short term, and should be compared in pounds rather than as an annualised rate.

Related guides

Need the VAT funded on a live deal?

Two-minute eligibility check. Approval in 48 hours, with no personal guarantees.

Check eligibility