Rights to the property:
zero.
One hundred percent liability for the debt, with everything you own, for up to thirty years ahead. And what the contract calls the signature decides whether that liability has a time limit or not.
A signature in an hour, liability for twenty years
The conversation usually sounds harmless. The son has found an apartment he likes, his income is not enough for approval, and the father signs “just so the deal goes through”. Nobody is lying to anybody and everyone means well. The problem is that the document being signed has nothing to do with support: it is taking on a debt.
Under Art. 122(1) of the Obligations and Contracts Act (Закон за задълженията и договорите, ЗЗД), the creditor can demand performance of the entire obligation from any one of the joint and several debtors. Not half, not the proportionate share, and without first having to pursue the principal debtor or first sell the mortgaged property. The bank starts wherever it is easier to collect. Under Art. 133 of the Obligations and Contracts Act, all of a debtor’s assets serve as general security for their creditors, so the liability does not stop at the mortgaged apartment: it reaches the salary, the bank accounts, the car and the signer’s own home.
On the other side sits the other half of the calculation. Being a co-debtor brings you nothing. It is an obligation, not an acquisition: it does not make the signer an owner, a co-owner or the holder of a share. Ownership is transferred by a notarial deed (нотариален акт), and the signature on the loan agreement does not appear in it. The mechanics of the purchase itself are in The notary certifies. Does not check.
The asymmetry fits in one line: zero rights to the property, one hundred percent liability for the debt, with everything you own, for up to thirty years ahead.
A co-debtor and a guarantor
are not two degrees of the same thing
The two roles sound like a heavier and a lighter version of one thing. They are not. They are governed by different sections of the Obligations and Contracts Act and differ in everything except joint and several liability.
A co-debtor owes their own debt (Art. 121 to 127 of the Obligations and Contracts Act). Their joint and several liability is not implied; it is agreed, meaning it is a clause in the contract. A co-debtor cannot raise against the bank the personal defences of the other debtors (Art. 122(3)). And after paying, under Art. 127(2), they can claim from the others only the amount above their own share: a parent who paid the whole instalment gets back half where the shares are equal, and only through the courts. If the other co-debtor is insolvent, the law spreads that person’s burden over the rest.
A guarantor owes someone else’s debt (Art. 138 to 148 of the Obligations and Contracts Act). The form is written and express. A guarantor is also jointly and severally liable (Art. 141), so that is not the difference. But a guarantor can raise all of the debtor’s defences (Art. 142), and after paying claims back the whole amount paid together with interest and costs (Art. 143) and steps into the creditor’s rights, including against those who gave a pledge or a mortgage (Art. 146).
And one difference that on its own is worth years: a guarantor’s liability has a special extinguishing time limit. A co-debtor’s liability does not.
What the signature is called does not decide what it is
This is the key finding of the topic, and it is not good news. Bank contracts as a rule call the third party a “joint and several debtor” (солидарен длъжник), even when that person receives not a single euro of the loan, does not use the property and acquires no share. Case law, however, distinguishes the two roles by substance, not by label: the test is whether the person secures someone else’s obligation or performs their own debt, that is, whether they have their own legal interest, receive funds, or acquire anything in return for their signature. When the person only guarantees, they are in substance a guarantor within the meaning of Art. 138 et seq., regardless of what the heading says.
Why this is a risk, not a way out. Requalification is established by a court, in a lawsuit, years later. It is not a position to negotiate from at the bank counter on the day of signing, and not something a person knows about themselves in advance. It depends on the specific wording: a contract in which the third party is named as a co-borrower, has declared that they use the funds, or has received a share of the property will most likely not be requalified.
So two sentences in the contract decide whether a person is liable with a time limit or without one. Those two sentences are read before signing, not interpreted after a default.
The six months
that usually have not started
The most repeated advice on the subject goes: if the bank does not file a claim within six months, the guarantee falls away. The legal basis exists. Art. 147(1) of the Obligations and Contracts Act gives the creditor six months after the principal obligation falls due, and the time limit is preclusive, meaning it cannot be suspended or interrupted: if the creditor misses it, the guarantor’s liability ends.
The problem is where the counting starts. With a loan repaid in instalments with different due dates, the clock does not start from the first missed instalment. Interpretative Decision No 5/2019 of the General Assembly of the Civil and Commercial Chambers of the Supreme Court of Cassation, delivered on 21 January 2022 (Тълкувателно решение № 5/2019 г. на ОСГТК на ВКС), held that the six-month period under Art. 147(1) starts to run when the entire debt becomes due, including where the loan has been declared due early (предсрочна изискуемост). The reasoning: spreading the debt into instalments does not split it into independent obligations; it remains one whole.
The practical consequence is the opposite of what people expect. The moment at which the loan is declared due early is chosen by the bank. With a twenty-five-year loan, a guarantor can wait a decade without a single day of their six months having started to run. The time limit is real and is the only advantage of being a guarantor. But its start is not controlled by the person relying on it.
Getting in takes one signature. Getting out takes consent.
The question “can they take me off later?” has a short answer: no, unless the bank agrees, and the bank has no reason to agree. The mechanism is assumption of debt under Art. 102(1) of the Obligations and Contracts Act (заместване в дълг): a third party can replace the debtor only with the express consent of the creditor. There is no unilateral exit, no period after which you drop out, and no right to demand release, even if everything has been paid perfectly from day one.
Three layers make refusal more likely than consent. First, the bank approved the loan precisely because of that income: removal means a new creditworthiness assessment on the remaining debt, and if the principal debtor alone does not meet the debt-service-to-income cap (and that is usually exactly why a co-debtor was needed), the answer is no. Second, in an assumption of debt the mortgage is preserved only if the persons who provided the security consent, so the number of signatures that have to line up grows. Third, the loan term is often allowed because of the age of a particular participant, so removing that person may mean shortening the term, which means a higher instalment.
There are ways out, but each of them is a new deal, not a fix: assumption of debt, refinancing in one name only (a new loan with a new valuation, new fees and a new registration), selling the property and repaying the loan, or early repayment, which under the Consumer Credit for Immovable Property Act (Закон за кредитите за недвижими имоти на потребители) carries no compensation once twelve monthly instalments have been paid since disbursement.
Someone else’s instalment goes
into your own numbers
The two most expensive misconceptions sound reasonable. The first: “it is being paid on time, so there is no problem”. The second: “I am the one paying, so the loan is mine, and he just signed”. Both break against the same mechanism.
The Central Credit Register (Централен кредитен регистър) sees the signature by name. Under Art. 3(2) of Ordinance No 22 of the Bulgarian National Bank (Наредба № 22 на БНБ), the register also keeps information on persons who are co-debtors and guarantors on loans, and institutions have been reporting this data since 2019. So the involvement is not a private arrangement between relatives but a fact visible to every bank at every future application. The register is updated monthly, by the 15th of the month following the reporting month, the data are kept for five years, and an individual gets a free report within 14 days. The trace remains for up to five years after the loan is repaid.
And the instalment counts in your own ratio. The debt-service-to-income cap measures all current payments on credit products, and the instalment on a loan where a person is a co-debtor is that person’s own obligation by virtue of Art. 122(1). Not someone else’s. Mechanically: with an income of €1,300 a month and a cap of 50 percent, the capacity is about €650; if €450 of that is taken by someone else’s instalment, about €200 a month is left for a loan of your own. Who actually pays changes nothing: the ratio measures the obligation, not the payer. The framework of the three caps is in the BNB tightened lending.
The third arrangement: property instead of a signature
There is also a third option that looks like the softer form. The parents do not join as co-debtors but create a mortgage on their own property as security for the child’s loan. A contractual mortgage is created by notarial deed between the creditor and the owner of the property, who may be a third party other than the debtor.
In one sense the feeling is right: there is no personal liability with all your assets here; liability is limited to the property. Except that a limit of “only up to the property” is no limit when the property is the only home. The mortgage follows the property and stays in force even after a sale, and the mortgage creditor is paid with priority from the price at a public auction under Art. 173(1) of the Obligations and Contracts Act, regardless of who owns the property at that moment.
Here too, the way out does not run through a time limit expiring but through new signatures. And there is a sequel that is rarely considered: if one of the owners dies, the property passes into the estate with its encumbrance, to all the heirs. How a property with an encumbrance moves through a sale is covered in The loan is paid off. The encumbrance stays.
The signature reaches people
who never signed anything
The last part of the topic is also the most uncomfortable, because it affects third parties who had no part in the decision.
The spouse who did not sign. In enforcement for a personal debt of one spouse, enforcement can be directed at an asset held as marital community property (съпружеска имуществена общност). Protection exists: under Art. 502 of the Civil Procedure Code (ГПК), the non-debtor spouse can point to personal assets of the debtor spouse, and if the claim can be satisfied from them, enforcement against the joint asset is stayed after the inventory; under Art. 503(3) the non-debtor spouse can also contest the claim on the same grounds. With real estate, the debtor’s undivided share is sold, not the whole property (Art. 504(2) in conjunction with Art. 500 of the Civil Procedure Code). But this protection does not trigger by itself: it requires action in enforcement proceedings, within time limits, with a lawyer. How a loan of one spouse affects the community is covered in marital community property.
The other children. A guarantor’s obligation does not end with their death: it passes into the estate, and the heirs who have accepted the inheritance are liable with all their own assets. The same applies to a co-debtor’s obligation. The only protection is procedural and has a time limit: renouncing the inheritance or accepting it under inventory (приемане по опис), in which case the heir is liable only up to the value of the inventoried assets. The mechanics of inheritance are in Inherited property: the missing signature.
So a parent who signs for one child also commits their other children, who have signed nothing and probably do not know about the signature. This is the strongest single fact on the topic, and no instalment reveals it.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a co-debtor and a guarantor?
A co-debtor owes their own debt, while a guarantor answers for someone else’s, and this is not a nuance but a different regime. Both are jointly and severally liable, so that is not the difference. A co-debtor cannot raise against the bank the personal defences of the other debtors, and after paying can claim from them only the amount above their own share under Art. 127(2) of the Obligations and Contracts Act. A guarantor can raise all of the debtor’s defences under Art. 142, claims back the whole amount paid together with interest and costs under Art. 143, and steps into the creditor’s rights. A guarantor’s liability has a special extinguishing time limit under Art. 147; a co-debtor’s liability does not.
Is it true that a guarantee falls away after six months?
The legal basis exists, but the period usually does not start where people expect it to. Art. 147(1) of the Obligations and Contracts Act gives the creditor six months after the principal obligation falls due, and the time limit is preclusive, meaning it cannot be suspended or interrupted. For a loan repaid in instalments with different due dates, however, Interpretative Decision No 5/2019 of the General Assembly of the Civil and Commercial Chambers of the Supreme Court of Cassation of 21 January 2022 held that the six months run from when the entire debt becomes due, including on early acceleration of the loan. That moment is determined by the bank, so with a long-term loan the clock may not start for years.
Can a co-debtor be removed from the loan later?
Only with the express consent of the bank, which it is not obliged to give. The mechanism is assumption of debt under Art. 102(1) of the Obligations and Contracts Act, and it amounts to a new creditworthiness assessment on the remaining debt. If the principal debtor alone does not meet the requirements, and that is usually exactly why a co-debtor was needed, the answer is no. In addition, the mortgage is preserved only if the persons who provided the security also consent. The real ways out are a new deal, not a fix to the old one: assumption of debt, refinancing in one name only, selling the property or early repayment.
Does being a co-debtor get in the way of my own loan if the instalments are paid on time?
Yes, and paying on time does not help, because the ratio measures the obligation, not the payer. Under Art. 3(2) of Ordinance No 22 of the Bulgarian National Bank, the Central Credit Register also keeps information on co-debtors and guarantors, so the involvement is visible by name to every bank. The instalment on the loan where you are a co-debtor counts in your own debt-service-to-income ratio. With an income of €1,300 and a cap of 50 percent, the capacity is about €650, and if €450 is already taken by someone else’s instalment, about €200 is left. The data in the register are kept for five years and updated by the 15th of the month following the reporting month, so there is no quick fix.
Read two lines
before you sign.
Open the draft contract and find two things. First: exactly what your role is called and in which section it sits, whether you are a co-borrower, a joint and several debtor or a guarantor. Second: whether it is declared anywhere that you use the funds or acquire a share of the property. Those few sentences decide whether your liability has a limit in time or runs for as long as the loan runs.
Send us the draft contract and the notarial deed of the property before anything is signed. We tell you whether you are taking on your own debt or someone else’s, what you acquire in return for your signature, how the instalment will count against your own borrowing capacity, and which ways out exist at all if you decide tomorrow to get out. If the question comes down to the wording of a clause, we will tell you that it belongs with a lawyer, not an agent.
Information as at 4 September 2026. This is not legal or financial advice, does not recommend a bank and does not replace a lawyer. Amounts are in euro at the fixed rate of 1 EUR = 1.95583 BGN.
Comments
No comments yet, be the first.